Testimony of Philip D. Smith, Director of Governmental Affairs, United Mine 

Workers of America. 

Good Evening. My name is Phil Smith. I am the Director of Governmental Affairs 

for the United Mine Workers of America. As you probably know by now, more 

than six thousand union members and their families marched through the streets of 

Pittsburgh today, raising their voices in opposition to this proposed rule. Some of 

them, including UMWA President Cecil Roberts, UMWA Secretary-Treasurer Dan 

Kane and the entire UMWA Executive Board were arrested as they engaged in 

nonviolent civil disobedience on the sidewalk outside this building. 

All these people came here today because they have serious concerns about the 

effect this proposed rule will have on their lives. EPA's own analysis of this rule 

acknowledges that thousands of coal miners will lose their jobs. That puts their 

ability to provide for their families at risk. And it puts the retirement security for 

retired miners, their dependents and widows at risk. 

That makes them, rightfully, very concerned. And since EPA has thus far refused 

to hold one of these hearings in the coal producing areas of the country, they had 

no choice but to come here to make their voices heard. 

And I assure you, you have not heard their voices for the last time. If EPA does not 

have the courage to come to the coalfields and look the people who will be most 

harmed by this and other rules in the eye, then they will keep coming to you. 

It is important that we put into perspective what this proposed rule does and does 

not do. Despite bearing a name only a focus group could love, the Clean Power 

Plan is and always was about taking action to reducing greenhouse gas emissions 

from existing sources. But will it? I have heard some in the environmental 

community complain that it does not go far enough. 

I can understand their point, if EPA's goal is to significantly reduce global 

greenhouse gas emissions. This proposed rule does not do that. Indeed, it will have 

a fairly insignificant effect on global emissions, reducing them by about 1 percent. 

One doesn't hear much about that from EPA and its cheerleaders. 

But in exchange for that one percent reduction, tens of thousands of coal miners, 

electrical workers, boilermakers, utility workers and railway workers will lose their 

jobs. The pensions and health care retired miners earned through decades of 
dangerous, backbreaking work will be threatened, if not eliminated entirely. The 

harmful effect on their families and their communities will be significant. 

We don't see this as a fair trade-off. Some say there will be other jobs created that 

our members can get. But where will those jobs be? What will they pay? What 

benefits will they have? You are asking people who earn about 27 dollars an hour 

plus benefits -- and believe me, they earn that money working in a coal mine -- to 

willingly give that job up, take the government's word for it that there will be 

another job, move away from the place where their families have lived and died for 

generations, then get retrained to do something that will likely pay much less than 

they earned before, with few if any benefits. Nor is it likely that this new job will 

have the protections of a union contract. How can anyone wonder why our 

members are upset about that prospect? 

Some have said that the United States needs to take the lead on combatting climate 

change with this rule. If we do it, others will follow, or so that line of thinking 

goes. But how do we know this? I am no expert in foreign affairs, but I do know 

something about economics and the global marketplace. 

The truth is that rising economic competitors like China and India have welcomed 

millions of what used to be American jobs to their shores in the past decades. They 

are able to do that by providing cheap labor and cheap energy. They will continue 

to have both in abundance for decades to come, and that energy is and will 

continue to be powered by coal no matter what we do. 

The UMWA does not dispute the science regarding climate change and the role 

greenhouse gas emissions play in that. We understand that steps need to be taken to 

address this issue. Our very real concern is that this proposed rule does not do that 

in a way that is fair to all Americans and their families. 

So here are my requests of you today. First, bring these hearings to the coalfields. 

You have a responsibility in a representative form of government to hear from 

those who are going to be most affected by this rule. 

Second, go back and take a look at how you can take meaningful steps in this rule 

to incentivize the development and application of technologies that will allow our 

nation to continue to take advantage of its most abundant fuel source, coal. 

Lastly, don't destroy the lives of the very people who did what our nation asked of 

them -- providing the coal that for the last 150 years has energized America and 
provided us with the means to become the most powerful nation on earth. Please, 

hear their voices. Thank you.