Extraction Industry Regulation

Yesterday I read a story in The Inter Mountain (Elkins, WV) covering the Republican gubernatorial debate in Wheeling Tuesday.  From the story it seemed the debate consisted of, not surprisingly, a lot of Obama bashing and fear-mongering.  One candidate even claimed that Obama was waging war on West Virginia industries because he didn't win the state in 2008.  I don't want to get into the ridiculousness of those arguments, but I do want to address a few things that were said by candidates during the discussion.

The first sentence in the article says this:

"Republicans seeking to be West Virginia's next governor want environmental regulator to keep their hands off the state's coal and gas industries."

I don't understand anyone, especially someone from West Virginia, especially so soon after Upper Big Branch disaster, who claims that regulation hurts West Virginia and her people, unless they are being paid to say that by the coal and gas industries.  Regulation and regulators are painted as vengeful beaurocrats out of touch with the world outside the beltway, which couldn't be farther from the truth.  These are people at the top of their scientific fields who do important research and make conclusions and regulation based on the most current science.

It seems to me that the purpose of the regulations are 1) to protect the health and safety of both the people who work in these industries and the people who live near the extraction points and 2) to protect the health of the environment.

When some "Free-Market" Republican says that regulators are hurting West Virginia workers, I say think about how things were before regulations.  The working environment was so bad before regulation that workers had to band together and literally fight a war with the coal barons to get the rights to a clean(er) and safe(r) work place and better pay.  Many hard working
 miners died to force companies into providing what I would argue are basic human rights.  The reason there are even laws for regulators to enforce are because companies won't (ever) self-regulate.

It is always funny to look at warning labels.  One of my favorites is on a serpentine belt for your car which says "Turn off engine before attempting to install."  The joke is that someone actually had tried to do that and therefore the warning label.  The same is true for regulations.  The reason there is a law regulating child labor is because companies used to keep the workers so poor that the children had to work to help the family.  We as a society decided that was not what we wanted our country to be and I am thankful for that. 

One hundred years ago, in 1911, 146 women died in the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in New York City because they were locked in the factory to supposedly prevent then from stealing.  This led to regulations on fire exits and locking doors in buildings.  In 1972 the town of Saunders in West Virginia was destroyed by a flood from a poorly built coal slurry impoundment killing 125 people and leaving 4,000 of the city's 5,000 people homeless.  New regulations followed.  I know these are extreme examples, but I think it proves my point.  Regulations are in place to control the way industries interact with their employees, the work environment, and the natural environment.  I, for one, think that sometimes the regulators are the only ones looking out for working men and women.  So when one of our Republican candidates for governor says that "(w)e need to tell (regulators) to get out of our state," I say I would happily pay higher taxes to have more regulators in our mines and on our gas drilling sites.  More regulators mean a healthier and safer work place and natural environment.

When asked "Do you support or oppose federal initiatives... to place new limits on greenhouse gases...," Clark Barnes, R-Randolph, had this to say.  "...(F)ederal regulators seem to be focusing on a religion of global warming."  This is pure ignorance and exudes nothing but disdain for scientists and quality scientific research.  Let me be clear.  There is scientific consensus that our Earth is not only warming, but warming because of the burning of carbon based fuels by humans.  The Republican denial of climate change is indefensible and just flat wrong.  The only possible reason for this willing ignorance is the money lining the pockets of state and federal Republican (and Democratic, if you're from WV) lawmakers. 

We need to teach our kids to respect the curiosity and the intelligence of the scientific community.  Republicans around the nation are fostering disdain for and hostility toward science.  Our nation will surely crumble if our children develop into willingly ignorant and uneducated adults.  But then again, that will keep the Republicans and corporations in power so I guess that's what they want.