Meanwhile

While our eyes and ears were held captive by the manufactured crisis surrounding raising the debt ceiling, so were the eyes and ears of the House Republicans. This turned out to be a good thing, as an unusually forthright editorial in the Los Angeles Times points out:

House republicans, especially those of the "tea party" ilk, think they know the cause of our country's economic woes: environmental regulations. As a result, they loaded up the appropriations bill that funds the Interior Department and the Environmental Protection Agency with dozens of riders that would encourage deadly pollution of the air and water, set back efforts to reduce greenhouse gases and allow uranium mining near the Grand Canyon, among other things. Such riders are commonplace on annual appropriations bills, but Washington insiders say they've never seen such a breathtaking assault on the environment.

If there was any good news from the chaos surrounding this week's deal to raise the federal debt ceiling, it's that the drawn-out congressional debate over the issue distracted GOP representatives from passing this monstrosity. The Interior appropriations bill will resurface after the August recess, but now it's unclear whether the House will approve it as a stand-alone bill or combine it with other appropriations bills into an omnibus spending package; also unclear is whether the anti-environment riders will survive the process. It's very important that they don't.

That's pretty strong language from the "center left" editorial board, but it gets even shriller:

Why are House Republicans so mad at Mother Nature? "Many of us think that the over-regulation from the EPA is at the heart of our stalled economy," Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) told the New York Times. Actually, it was a failure to properly regulate the mortgage industry that caused the meltdown, not environmental protections that have been in place, through economic good times and bad, since the 1970s. Nor are planned regulations that won't go into effect for years the source of our current financial problems. But they do make a convenient scapegoat for those who would rather not discuss further regulation of the financial industry. [Emphasis added]

Hallelujah! They finally get it!

Of course, the benefactors of House Republicans, whether its Shell Oil or the Koch brothers, want those pesky regulations lifted in order to make more money without any of the attendant responsibilities, state of the earth be damned. Now that the first manufactured crisis is over, the next one is being prepared and will be delivered in September as Republicans urge the regulations be lifted because they are job killers.

What I found heartening was the on-the-money analysis and blunt language of the editorial, something altogether too rare in this newspaper and others. I think we're making some headway.

Finally

Back In The News

Massey Energy Company, owner of the Upper Big Branch coal mine in West Virginia where 29 miners died in an explosion in April, 2010, is back in the news. Another piece in the puzzle of why this tragedy occurred has fallen into place.

From the New York Times:

Kevin Stricklin, administrator for coal at the Mine Safety and Health Administration, described a dual accounting system practiced by Massey before the deadly explosion, in which safety problems and efforts to fix them were recorded in an internal set of books, out of sight of state inspectors, and off the official books that the law required them to keep. ...

Some of the findings echoed a report issued by an independent team of state investigators this month, which blamed Massey and a culture of impunity for the explosion. But these findings went further, saying that Massey took systematic and premeditated steps to circumvent government inspections. [Emphasis added]

Pretty tricksy, that keeping of separate sets of books, not to mention reminiscent of the illegal practices of other crooked businesses. By keeping the safety hazards noted by employees and managers of the mine off the official books, government inspectors were kept in the dark about problems and therefore didn't follow up with the mine to make certain the problems had been rectified. Fewer inspections means more coal mined, which means more profits for the company. It's a pretty straightforward equation.

Of course, too often it also means more people dead. In this case, 29 more people dead.

Somebody tell me again why government regulations are bad, and I don't want any of that malarkey about them being "job killers." More is at stake here.

End Around

A New York Times editorial brings some good news this morning. Because Congress won't do its job, the Obama administration is going to do the job for the cowards on the Hill when it comes to mine safety.

Congress vowed to change things after the Upper Big Branch explosion, and then gave in, again, to Big Coal. The executive proposals would make it much harder for mine owners to game the violations process with extended appeals that let them keep operating and risking miners’ lives. A 34-year-old law providing for mine shutdowns has never been applied in the category of the worst offenders — a blight on industry and political appointees who shirked their oversight responsibilities.

Under the new regulations, the Mine Safety and Health Administration would be empowered to shut down a mine with a record of chronic safety violations — instead of waiting years for litigation to play out. Massey’s record was horrendous, and it was allowed to keep working dangerous mines like Upper Big Branch.

It's been ten months since 29 miners died at the Upper Big Branch mine owned by Massey Energy. Congress has done nothing to change the way mining companies do business when it comes to safety in their mines. Mining companies cited for violations continue in "business as usual" mode because they are allowed to do so via the lengthy and outmoded appeals process currently in place.

Giving the Mining Safety and Health Administration the regulatory power to shut down mines with horrific safety records is the right step to take. When it is more expensive to operate unsafely than safely, mining companies might get the message. This is one area where regulating business is necessary. That's the kind of real regulatory reform the country needs.