Connect the Dots: Karl Rove's Politics Uber Alles Strategy and the Utah Mine Disaster
What makes Karl Rove's politics uber alles strategy chilling is connecting the dots between it and the Utah mining disaster.
Rove's unprecedented use of federal assets for political gain, laid out in yesterday's Washington Post, meant that every tool at his disposal was employed to help foster his goal of a permanent Republican majority. "It was all politics, all the time," Rep. Henry Waxman told WaPo.
"It was total commitment," marveled Rep. Thomas Davis III, who worked closely with Rove in 2002 on the GOP's House reelection campaign. "We knew history was against us, and [Rove] helped coordinate all of the accoutrements of the executive branch to help with the campaign."
These accouterments included, in the words of the Post, "enlisting political appointees at every level of government in a permanent campaign that was an integral part of [Rove's] strategy to establish electoral dominance." But Rove's plan involved much more than having Cabinet officials make election year visits bearing federal goodies to the districts of embattled Republicans; it also meant using the government's regulatory mechanisms to reward major GOP contributors. Major contributors such as Big Coal.
Coal mining interests have donated more than $12 million to federal candidates since the Bush-era began with the 2000 election cycle, with 88% of that money -- $10.6 million -- going to Republicans.
And what did that largess buy the coal mining industry? Mine safety regulators far more interested in looking out for the financial well-being of mine owners than for the physical well-being of miners.
Exhibit A is Bush's "mine safety" czar, Richard Stickler, whose agency both approved the controversial mining technique used at the Crandall Canyon Mine before the collapse, and oversaw the rescue operation.
Stickler is a former coal company manager with such a lousy safety record at the companies he'd run that his nomination as head of the Mine Safety and Health Administration was twice rejected by Senators from both parties, forcing Bush to sneak him in the back door with a recess appointment.
In other words, the guy the White House tapped to protect miners is precisely the kind of executive the head of the Mine Safety and Health Administration is supposed to protect miners from. And now Stickler is the one who will lead the "investigation" into what happened in Utah -- unless there is enough public outcry to force a truly independent investigation.
Of course, industry-friendly regulators like Stickler have been the rule under Bush, not the exception. Indeed, Bush's first mine safety czar was Dave Lauriski, a former mining executive who had earned a reputation for aggressively defending the interests of mine owners. For chapter and verse on Lauriski, read this terrific article by Ken Ward, Jr. in the Washington Monthly, but here is the nub of the matter: Lauriski took office promising mine owners that he would "collaborate more with stakeholders on regulatory initiatives" and become "less confrontational" with mine operators.
Exactly what did he mean by "less confrontational"? According to Ward, during his tenure, Lauriski "filled [MSHA's] top jobs with former industry colleagues, dropped more than a dozen safety proposals initiated during the Clinton administration, and cut almost 200 of the agency's 1,200 coal mine inspectors. Mine-safety experts have linked many of these actions to the causes of deadly mine safety accidents since 2001." Among the mine-safety regulations Lauriski dropped was one that would have deepened investigations of mining accidents.
No doubt Murray and the owners of the coal mines where over 170 miners have died since Lauriski gutted those safety regulations are happy that he did.
Lauriski resigned after 60 Minutes revealed that the MSHA had improperly awarded no-bid contracts to coal industry companies to which he was tied.
It's worth noting that the person Bill Clinton appointed to head MSHA, J. Davitt McAteer, was not a coal-industry insider -- indeed, he had been a key force behind the 1969 Coal Mine Health and Safety Act, had worked with Ralph Nader on workplace safety reforms, and was running a public-interest law firm focused on occupational safety when Clinton tapped him. He therefore came to the job with a very different perspective than the one required by Rove's objective of using government agencies as accoutrements for the GOP's permanent campaign.
Putting foxes in charge of the henhouse has been standard operating procedure for Rove's hyper-politicized White House. The long list of industry hacks given key slots at federal agencies will forever stand as the ultimate tribute to Rove's effectiveness in turning the federal government into an arm of the Republican Party -- and a payback machine for those that funded it. For a primer on the hackocracy, check out the New Republic, TomPaine.com, and the Denver Post.
In far too many cases, these cynical appointments that put the Party's interest above the public interest, have left our country less safe, our environment more polluted, our fellow citizens less healthy -- and, in the case of the Crandall Canyon Mine, three of them dead, and six others in all likelihood entombed in the mine forever.
Karl Rove may be on his way out the door, but the destructive legacy of his politicization of the federal government will be with us for many years to come.
Follow Arianna Huffington on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ariannahuff
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Karl Rove continues to haunt the political opposition with his genius mind. Is he for Hillary,or isn't he? All who oppose The Great Karl Rove now are beginning to realize he is more powerful for the 2008 election than he was for the 2004 election. I salute this great American political mind.
You're a great writer, Arianna, but I take issue with:
"In far too many cases, these cynical appointments that put the Party's interest above the public interest, have left our country less safe, our environment more polluted, our fellow citizens less healthy -- and, in the case of the Crandall Canyon Mine, three of them dead, and six others in all likelihood entombed in the mine forever."
Cynicism doesn't get people dead. Criminal behavior does.
Cynical: Contemptuously, bitterly mocking.
Arianna is *Spot-On* in her use of the term cynical.
Yet, you express another important view about criminality of such cynical actions set in motion by this administration.
The first step was limiting people's ability to sue by capping the amount anyone can sue for pain and suffering.
That basically put a price on human life for the cost benefit analysis. If it costs 2 million to put in safety equipment, but only 1 million for the dead miner's families. It's cheaper to kill miners than put in safety equipment.
What kind of rapacious predators are our business schools turning out? Aren't business ethics classes on the curriculum anymore? But I'm sure these people never miss services at their church of synagogue.
Business is a religion. It worships (whoreships) money and sacrifices people.
What's amazing is no one is talking about Elaine Chao the Secretary of Labor, and the ultimate boss of Mr. Stickler.
She is the wife of Mitch McConnell, senator from Kentucky. He is owned by big coal.
Elaine has ruthlessly driven out the mining safety and regulatory experts in her department. She has replaced them with industry hacks or outsourced the work all together.
The department of labor has avoided scandal so far but the problems go well beyond the deep mines. There has been no regulation of strip mining which is much more dangerous to larger numbers of people. I expect we are going to find large sections of West Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee have been environmentally devastated and poisoned beyond repair.
Look for large numbers of new cancer patients, mis-carriages, retardation, and autism.
This is beyond criminal. May God have Mercy on all of our souls.
The coal mine tradegy is the same old story of business owners that are not overly concerned with employee safety. Their concern is one thing - profits. In a certain sense, the business owners are playing the game of capitalism that pervades Canada, and the United States. I blame congress a bit for not protecting the coal miners, private entrepreneurs left alone are dangerous, the state should step in for the protection of the common good of its citizens.
It is a shame because these miners are hard working, family orientated Americans who deserve much, much more.
Deserve more? I could be wrong but they probably voted for Bush and his Repugnantican co-conspirators because their ministers and preachers told them to do so.
The working class inhabitants of the red states seem to have voted against their own interests since Reagan.
Pete Ross, That is a great observation. And you are correct.
Bushies are in favor of "voluntary compliance
Instead of subordinating ourselves to the rule of these neofaschists we should just offer up "voluntary compliance". Since amassed wealth is considered an entity protected by our constitution, given the same rights as the individual citizen, shouldn't that set legal precedent for the citizen to only comply to the law in a strictly voluntary way?
Much like the Creticist-in-Charge does with its signing statements.
When you put in the most corrupt and least qualified, he knows it and you know it...being overly dependent on the bosses good graces, makes this deficient one a loyal flunky.
Its the Shock and Awe of the Peter Principle brought to you by Bushco.
Who really woulda thunk it?
When will Congress wake up to these "crimes?" and start doing something about it?
When the rubber stamp Repugnanticans are replaced in sufficient quantity to no longer be able to obstruct the Democrat majorities.
Dearest Arianna,
This post is why you will always be number one in my book and why I heart ya SOoooooooooooo!
Good on ya! Agape.
What's the deal with these "recess appointments"? Why the loophole?
I realize that the Democrats have an enormous amount of work to do (assuming they have the spine to do it), but this is ridiculous. How in the world can Congress allow the Administration to get away with actually coopting the federal government and press it into service for the GOP?
This isn't akin to criminal conduct -- it IS criminal conduct, as Rove, who is acutely aware of the Hatch Act, knows full well.
When will someone have the vision to see that this is an opportunity to become a hero? Seriously, with all the corruption and sophistry going on -- at unprecedented levels -- in Washington, if someone had the backbone to stand up to the inevitable hissing double-talk, they'd have the chance to make history by taking the lead and forcing the guilty off the Sunday talk shows and into federal prison.
Whatever..
I apologize if you've gotten the impression that I in any way am defending the geopolitical, nazi-like fascism practiced by the current powers-that-be. Nothing could be further from the TRUTH or MY rhetoric the last couple of years here at HuffPost.
But make NO mistake that I drink the kool-aid of neither/same party as government has/is been/being practiced for the last several decades in this country. Go ahead and tell me about the time Bill Clinton stood up against lobbies influence and campaign financing corruption, because I don't remember it. Hillary just defended the practice on national TV a week ago, saying lobbies are "...real Americans".
In plain lingo, it's a practice of providing better representation in OUR government for those that provide you the most campaign financing. No matter how much a candidate proclaims freedom from influence, it's NOT the way it works or industry and big-business would not win every fight or escape every punishment.
If you want to tell yourself the system's NOT tilted in their favor on both sides of the isle, have at it, just don't assume most others will see it that way also.
There ought to be a law.
There probably either is- being ignored with impunity, or was, before Republicon deregulation.
Great Post, Arianna!
Continue your great work.
Great to see you on Countdown last Thursday.
Many thanks.
The conservatives see this as political undermining of what regulations they can't eliminate entirely. This whole policy is spelled out in think tank publications. They live in a delusional world where resources are unlimited and the worst possible offense is for the government to interfere in the dealings between two consenting corporations. Milton Friedman's economics treats externalities as a nuisance, but in reality with humans filling up the planet and stressing natural resources, externalities become far more significant. What conservatives can not accomplish through legislation, they undermine through incompetence. They went to Baghdad to privatize it and what we have now is a monumental disaster.
The free market is the beating heart of conservatives and we need to drive a stake through it.
Could you please cite some of these think tank publications that take the positions you attribute to conservatives? I'm a fairly avid reader of publications from various perspectives and I can't recall reading one that takes any of the positions you assert all market conservatives hold dear.
Also, if you could cite a single instance where an economy without free-market principles succeeded for more than a decade or two, that would be instructive, as well, since none readily come to mind, although myriad failures do.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
