Opposition to the Nomination of Richard Stickler

OPPOSITION TO THE NOMINATION OF RICHARD STICKLER

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I rise to oppose the confirmation of Richard Sticker as Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety. I also ask the Senate to send a message of confidence and hope to the miners across America that we in the Senate are no longer willing to put coal industry executives that care more about profits than lives in charge of their safety.

How many of us recall the recent news stories coming out of Kentucky and West Virginia--heartbreaking stories--where lives were lost and families waited expectantly aboveground praying that those miners would be found and be brought back safely, and how many times that was not the case.

What brings about safety in these coal mines, so deep in the Earth? The vigilance of the agencies, Federal and State, that keep an eye on the companies that are operating out of the view of most of the world. Those are the things that are important. Today, we will have a chance to vote on a man who wants to head the Federal agency when it comes to mine safety. Unfortunately, Mr. Stickler is yet another in a long line of coal industry executives nominated by this administration.

The last industry appointee to the Mine Safety and Health Administration withdrew or delayed final action on 18 mine safety rules. The result was disastrous--disastrous to the tune of 33 coal mine deaths in America in 2006.

Two of the rules that could have been enacted and were not by the predecessor to the man being appointed to this position had the potential to speed the rescue and increase the chance of survival for the 14 miners killed in the recent West Virginian Sago and Alma mine disasters.

One would have sped up the formation of rescue teams. The other would have provided more oxygen for the miners. Both of these rules could have saved miners' lives this year. But the Mine Safety and Health Administration didn't enact the rules. Why? Because doing so would have cost the coal companies money. It is just that simple. And now 33 miners have paid with their lives, and Congress was forced to act.

We passed a new law this year--a law that was pushed by the Senators from West Virginia, Senators BYRD and ROCKEFELLER--which I was happy to support because of the coal mining in my own home State of Illinois. It is called the Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2006. It mandates the formation of two mine safety teams available within an hour of an accident. Such quick response mine rescue teams might have saved lives at these coal mines in America this year.

This new law also mandates the purchase of wireless tracking and messaging equipment and extra oxygen for miners underground. Both of these provisions could also have saved lives.

My concern with Mr. Stickler's nomination is not solely that he is a coal executive--that doesn't disqualify him--but that he clearly stated during his confirmation hearing that these new provisions in the law are not needed. He unequivocally stated that no new laws are needed and that the laws on the books, which haven't been updated, incidentally, in 30 years, to adjust for new technology in coal mining, according to Mr. Stickler, those 30-year-old laws are just fine. And he said this after the Sago mine explosion that took the lives of 12 coal miners.

I can't support a nominee to be head of mine safety when he opposes the recently passed Miner Act. This law, which the Senate passed by unanimous consent, without one single Senator dissenting, was a recognition by all of us that mine safety laws need to be updated in order to protect the coal miners and to stop the unnecessary and sad and tragic loss of life. But Mr. Stickler, who wants to be head of this Federal agency to protect coal miners across America, disagrees.

Furthermore, Mr. Stickler argues that the duty to comply with safety laws falls on the shoulders of the mine companies, and that the agency he wants to head plays no role. He told a committee of the Senate that he believes there is a compliance problem, not an enforcement problem, in the mine industry. Mr. Stickler doesn't seem to understand that without enforcement, there will be no compliance. Any industry left on its own to comply with Federal and local laws will often fail to do so. That is a reality--a reality Mr. Stickler doesn't even understand.

I am astonished that President Bush would nominate a person to head this important safety agency who has such little regard for the need to enforce the laws of the land, to protect the lives of coal miners, and to spare families from the grief that so many have suffered this year.

Mr. Stickler's statements at his confirmation hearing fly in the face of reality, and I ask: What do his comments say to the families of those 33 lost miners?

Many of these families oppose the confirmation of Mr. Stickler because of his opposition to revising mine safety laws and his live-and-let-live position on enforcement regulations. They are not alone. The United Mine Workers and the AFL-CIO also oppose Mr. Stickler's nomination. All of us in the Senate supported passage of a new law to save miners' lives. We unanimously supported it. Mr. Stickler doesn't believe that legislation was even necessary.

We also know that enforcement of the laws is needed to compel mine operators to comply with the laws. Mr. Stickler, again, disagrees.

We learned a bitter lesson about 11 months ago on the gulf coast. Hurricane Katrina, the worst natural disaster to strike America, came with warning, devastating New Orleans and many communities in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. Even with 3 or 4 days' warning that this hurricane was about to strike and could have devastating impact, the Federal Emergency Management Administration was not ready. They were not prepared.

Unfortunately, the person who headed up the agency effort, Mr. Michael Brown, didn't do everything he could have done and, as a result, lives were lost, people suffered, there was damage that was totally unnecessary, and the rescue effort was slow to come and, sadly, too late for many.

The lesson from Michael Brown at FEMA was that you don't put a person whose speciality in life is Arabian horses in charge of the Federal Emergency Management Administration. He wasn't ready for the job, and as a result of that people died and people suffered.

So now what do we have today? We have Mr. Richard Stickler, an executive from a coal company, who is now going to be put in charge of watching coal companies. Why? Because he is charged with the safety of coal miners. When one listens to his responses to the questions at the committee hearing, it is clear that he has taken a position with which most coal companies would agree: We don't need no more regulation; we don't need no more enforcement; we don't need no more meddling Federal agencies.

Maybe that point of view would have prevailed some time past, but this year we know better.

Coal mining, one of the most dangerous occupations in America, has claimed 33 lives this year. This Congress understood it. We passed unanimously a change in the law to protect those coal miners. We cannot afford to put in that agency a person in charge who is not going to spend every minute and every ounce of his strength to protect those coal miners and be an advocate for their families. Mr. Stickler is not that person.

On behalf of the 3,500 coal miners in my home State of Illinois and all of the coal miners across the country, I urge my fellow Senators to oppose the confirmation of Mr. Stickler for this important position.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

http://thomas.loc.gov