House Rejects Mine Safety Bill Prompted By West Virginia Disaster

WASHINGTON — The House on Wednesday rejected a bill that would have adopted sweeping changes in mine safety regulations in response to the explosion that killed 29 West Virginia coal miners in April.

The measure would have made it easier to shut down problem mines, increased penalties for serious safety violations and offered more protection for whistle-blowers.

Democrats brought up the bill under a special procedure in which debate was limited and no amendments were allowed. That procedure requires a two-thirds majority to pass. The vote – largely divided along party lines – was 214-193 in favor of passage, short of the two-thirds needed.

Republicans say the bill is still too punitive and call it premature because investigators are still looking into the Upper Big Branch disaster. GOP lawmakers faulted Democrats for introducing a new version of the bill late last week with no warning and failing to consult with Republicans.

"The Democrats' bill being considered today does little to address mine safety, but rather imposes severe penalties on businesses, introduces dramatic regulatory changes and promotes unnecessary litigation which will hurt those mines and miners operating in good faith," said Republican Rep. Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia.

But Democratic Rep. George Miller of California, chairman of the House Committee on Education and Labor and the bill's chief sponsor, said Republicans had "turned their backs on miners."

"As other mine tragedies have shown us in the past, inaction today is paid for with the lives of hardworking miners tomorrow," Miller said.

The bill was a stripped-down version of a more expansive measure that a House committee approved earlier this year. Democrats introduced the latest version last Friday night – after removing provisions that would have applied tougher safety laws to every business in the country – in a last-ditch bid to win approval before Republicans take control of the House next year.

It targeted mines like the Upper Big Branch mine in Montcoal, W.Va., site of the deadliest accident in the U.S. coal industry since 1970 and the subject of unresolved criminal and civil investigations.

The mine, owned by Massey Energy Co., was subject to more serious safety violations than any in the country. But lawmakers say loopholes in the system allowed the company to file lengthy appeals that delayed penalties.

Comments

[GreenKate]

02:42 AM on 12/29/2010

Sounds like these GOP reps are who Jay Rockefeller needs to be complaining to; not Obama (see other story). Maybe he can make his fellow West Virginian, Shelley Moore Capito, see the need for "dramatic regulatory changes."

[H P]

11:05 PM on 12/11/2010

Hey I thought Republicans were compromising now?!?!?! That is what everybody is saying about Obama's Bush tax law extention... OH but this doesn't give any tax breaks to mining companies.. or allow more mountain top removal or allow clean air exemptions.. I get it now.. this would just protect middle class working people, we can't have any of that can we No-publicans?

[bcmom]

05:09 PM on 12/10/2010

Huh!!!!!!!! What is wrong with us?

[pyt333]

04:07 PM on 12/10/2010

When did we stop caring about each other and the safety of our neigbors? How could you vote against something that helps protect people working in such a dangerous industry. Why aren't we taking care of each other anymore?

[ritgar]

02:46 AM on 12/10/2010

And these states are the ones that votes these w@nker$ in against their own best interests. Good luck to you.

[kolach]

09:41 PM on 12/09/2010

The republicans sure know how to spin it like they're caring for you, when of course they mean more safety regulations means less profit for corporations.

[Danilo Gurovich]

03:30 PM on 12/09/2010

"Republicans say the bill is still too punitive"

29 dead miners and years of safety violations? Short of Sharks with Laser Beams on their foreheads, I don't think it could be TOO punitive!

I grew up in a mining town, and I don't know anyone that ever thought the management cared about safety. It was always about what they could get away with.

[dbrett480]

01:27 PM on 12/09/2010

This article doesn't explain why the Dumocrats put the bill up for a vote that would require 2/3 approval.

[Danilo Gurovich]

03:31 PM on 12/09/2010

3 votes short, out of 435 possible.

[jsgaetano]

01:21 PM on 12/09/2010

Pandering to the Pollution Industry is how conservatives "protect America".
 
But the question people have been asking since 4/19/1995 is, who's protecting America from the conservatives?

[Steve Rockett]

12:24 PM on 12/09/2010

Okay, every six months a republican politician has to go down in a mine and work for just one day. It has to be the mine with the worst safety record in their state. We will call this the "Canary Project."

[jsgaetano]

01:23 PM on 12/09/2010

It won't work.  Conservatives weaseled out of going to Iraq and Afghanistan too.  When we made Operation Yellow Elephant, America saw that when conservatives claimed Iraq and Afghanistan were "the definitive struggles of our times", that conservatives had "other priorities".

[SeeTheFnords]

03:27 PM on 12/11/2010

A few things to add to your most wonderful idea: take them in the middle of the night, do not warn the mines they are coming, and make it at least one week - the poor sod does need to go through the 'mandatory safety training' before heading down. And, of course, be treated as any other new grunt. Otherwise, our poor politician would not be able to do much more than wander around being babysat.
At least us Canadians learned lessons from our Westray mine disaster.

[Steve Rockett]

12:19 PM on 12/09/2010

So all you mining states, how did you vote in the midterms? Are your miners expendable? Do you worship money or is safety of your fellow Americans a bigger priority?

[jsgaetano]

01:24 PM on 12/09/2010

Conservatives have always been the chickens voting for Colonel Sanders, and they always will be.

[Kenz300]

12:07 PM on 12/09/2010

Big oil, big coal and billionaires bought the last election.

Average working people were convinced to vote against their best interests.

Now it is payback time for all that corporate and special interest money.

[BebeLush]

10:52 AM on 12/09/2010

Once again, the Grand Old Party thumbs their nose at the safety of human beings. Disgraceful.

[hobo62]

10:41 AM on 12/09/2010

Too punitive? Twenty nine dead miners would disagree with the GOP.

[sean62965]

12:43 PM on 12/09/2010

Why not make it mandatory life in prison for CEO's of un-safe mines where a life is lost? No new rules needed besides that ONE.
Their accounts will be drained to pay the families of the deceased. Assets of the CEO will be confiscated and sold at auction.
Or, we just let things go the way they go and the people who work in the mines can sign a form acknowleging the inherent dangers.
Politicians need donations to run a campaign to keep their jobs. They will never do something that will end their grazy trains. Why do we keep expecting them to do what is right over what fills their coffers?
This isn't something new.

[ObjectiveRealist]

09:25 AM on 12/09/2010

When somebody is so negligent in their pursuit of profit that somebody else dies or is seriously injured, one of the reasons government exists, civilized peoples agree, is to be very punitive.

"Republicans say the bill is still too punitive and call it premature because investigators are still looking into the Upper Big Branch disaster."

Oh, there are still details to learn, but we all know it's Ken Blankenship's fault that 29 people died. It's not too early to write punitive legislation that makes his reckless style of management so unprofitable that everybody keeps their workers safe from now on. It's really not a lot to expect that all legislators should agree, regardless of their political party, that it's their duty to make killing people less profitable than making businesses safe for every worker.