macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2008-01-16
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. today I rise in strong support of legislation that would greatly enhance the health and safety protections in the Nations coal mines. Despite significant progress over the last several decades. mining remains one of the most dangerous jobs in America. Mining fatalities occur at a rate more than seven times the average of all private industries. and we are reminded of how dangerous mining can be by the tragedies like the one in Utah in August of this last year. where six miners and three rescuers died in what appears to have been a preventable disaster. and the tragedies of Kentucky and West Virginia in 2006. Accidents every year claim the lives of one or two miners at a time. In 2007. according to the Mine Safety and Health Administration. 32 coal miners and 31 metaland nonmetal miners died on the job. Miners also face serious health risks. including a resurgence of black lung disease. The legislation we are considering today. the SMINER Act. builds on the work of the last Congress when it passed the MINER Act of 2006. The SMINER Act represents a comprehensive approach to minimize the health and safety risks facing miners. It is critical that Congress take this action. because one of the things that is clear is that we cannot leave mine safety and health to the Bush administration. When the Sago Mine disaster occurred. we learned that the Bush administration had withdrawn or delayed more than a dozen health and safety proposals that would have benefited miners. The Bush administration filled toplevel positions at MSHA with executives from the very industry that the agency was charged with regulating. Dangerous rules favored by the industry. which would leave miners vulnerable to aggressive "belt air" fires. became law under this administration. From 2001 to 2006. the Bush administration gutted MSHA by cutting funding and staffing. and especially in coal mine enforcement. where the worst tragedies would strike in 2006 and 2007. Even as coal production increased around the country. the Bush administration cut the Mine Safety and Health Administrations coal enforcement personnel by 9 percent by 2006. And then came the Sago disaster. Aracoma Alma. Darby. and Crandall Canyon mines. Even after these recent tragedies. even after the MINER Act was enacted. we continue to see neglect from this administration. The Inspector General found this past fall that MSHA was failing to conduct mandated inspections on time. leaving thousands of miners unprotected. In 2006 alone. MSHA failed to complete the required inspections of 107 mines. employing 7.500 miners. And. Secretary Chao failed to meet a simple deadline under the MINER Act to produce regulations on rescue teams. fundamental regulations on rescue teams. at the end of this last year. The track record of this administration on mine safety and health has been horrendous. and Congress needs to act That is why we are here today. to make sure that our government fulfills its obligations to protect those brave men and women who risk their safety to keep this country running.
Date: 2008-01-16
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself 30 seconds. My colleague from California said that we had a study in this. Yes. we have a study for the Secretary to determine the bestway to implement a drug testing and treatment program after 6 months of talking to the States and local agencies and the -companies and the miners. We dont impose this from Washington. And then the Secretary. if she determines that it is feasible. she is instructed to start the program. We just thought it would be wise to consult the companies who have programs. States that have programs. the miners themselves. the local public health agencies. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Iowa .
Date: 2008-01-16
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself 30 seconds. The gentleman should have finished reading the rest of the letter where NIOSH says that these technical modifications can be addressed quickly. And. in fact. the preliminary feedback is that manufacturers have already made many of these. and they have already been implemented. Read the whole letter. I suggest that the gentleman on the other side of the aisle read the legislation. and when they want to introduce evidence. read the. complete evidence. I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from California .
Date: 2008-01-16
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

I thank the gentleman for his support of this legislation. and more importantly. to thank him for all of his support on behalf of workers during our first session of Congress. I thank you for your attendance at the hearings and advocacy and questions on behalf of workers. I know of your very strong interest in miners. and I want to thank you for your advocacy on behalf of all workers.
Date: 2008-01-16
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

I yield myself 30 seconds. The gentleman from Alaska is quite correct. Its a pathetic sight to see the President of the United States begging. the Saudi prince to release more oil 8 years after that President has been in office. several energy bills passed by the Republican Congress. and the President is left going hat in hand begging the Saudi prince for more oil. It just shows the opportunity cost of this administration. of that Republican Congress and the pathetic energy policy that we were left with. The new energy bill. however. reverses that trend. Im very proud to be part of it.
Date: 2008-01-16
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

I yield myself 30 seconds. I want to thank the gentleman. Ive had an opportunity to read the letter from his constituents. and I want to thank him for entering it into the RECORD. Its on behalf of those families and the families of the other mining tragedies who have also written to us that we made a pledge in our committee. as the gentleman knows. that this committee was going to be very diligent about pursuing mine safety. 0l 1315 It had been ignored for too long. The families had been closed out of the process. They were not allowed to testify. They were not allowed to go to the investigations. They were not allowed to attend the hearings. and this legislation changes much of that. And youre quite correct and I want to thank him and his constituents for the support of this legislation.
Date: 2008-01-16
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Im the only speaker. We were looking for a gentlewoman to do a colloquy. but shes not here. If she shows up. I would do the colloquy with her. but I wouldnt take additional time. So you can go ahead and use your time.
Date: 2008-01-16
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

I want to thank you for your support of this legislation. I would note that the managers amendment will slow down the required schedule of underground mines to convert to the new more fireresistant conveyer belts. These belts will help prevent deaths in all kinds of underground mines. And the amendment will ensure that mine operators have a chance to use up the perfectly good belts that they have in their inventory. Also. the SMINER Act will not adopt new safety standards for underground noncoal mines. except for the conveyor belt. and in this case. the mines which regularly emit methane gas. new rules for explosionproof seals. It certainly does not treat these mines like. coal mines. The current air quality standards for underground salt mines are based on 1973 rules established by a private organization and incorporated by reference into the MSHA regulations. It is hard to even locate a copy of these old standards. It is the intent of SMINER to adopt air standards that are justified by the unbiased scientific evidence as preventing health risks to miners and are feasible for the mines to achieve. If mine operators object to the new mine health limits based upon concerns of technological or economic feasibility. the bill requires them to fully analyze these concerns before adopting new standards. By speeding up the rulemaking process. we want to accelerate MSHA to address real hazards. but do not intend to adopt unsupported standards that do not create significant benefits or are not feasible for compliance.
Date: 2008-01-16
Speaker: HERSETH SANDLIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I rise today to thank Chairman GEORGE MILLER and his colleagues on the House Education & Labor Committee for their work on H.R. 2768. Supplemental Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2007 or SMINER. The efforts of the Committee further address the dangers associated with mining. particularly the threats to coal miners we have seen all too frequently. most recently with the Crandall Canyon Mine disaster in 2007. While I supported the MINER Act in 2006 and believe that Congress has a responsibility to continue to strengthen mine health and safety regulations. I am not able to support H.R. 2768 because of the unintended consequences it may have on mining operations outside of the coal industry. While I acknowledge the Education and Labor Committees efforts to engage industry in this debate. I feel the concerns of the surface mining industry are not adequately addressed in this legislation. As such. SMINER may unnecessarily harm many small miningoperations with new burdensome compliance requirements. In South Dakota. aggregate mining operations create good paying jobs and provide products essential to the construction industry. They are an important part of numerous local economies in the state. Therefore. I cannot discount the concerns of aggregate mining operations over the process by which "permissible exposure limits" (PELs) will be adopted under SMINER. With the cost of road construction and maintenance skyrocketing. South Dakota and other states are often forced to make tough decisions. If aggregate miners are required to adopt additional regulations under SMINER. we may see the cost of this construction component rise even higher. I believe it is imperative that we continue to closely monitor the progress of MINER implementation. and I will continue to look for ways to support regulation reform that protect the health and safety of mine workers.
Date: 2008-01-16
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

This amendment. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. does four things. First. it will authorize $30 million for the Department of Labor to buy a new generation of personal dust monitors required by the builder and provide them to miners. These dust monitors greatly enhance the accuracy in measuring the concentration of coal dust in underground coal mines. Both miner and industry representatives have expressed support for this initiative. It will go a long -way in helping us reverse the rise in black lung and save untold amounts of costs in dealing with such debilitating disease. Second. the amendment will increase the time permitted for the mining industry to install a new generation of fireresistant conveyor belts. significantly cutting industry compliance costs with the underlying bill. This amendment takes into account the industry concerns aboeu significant amounts of oldstyle conveyor belts already purchased and in reserve. Under this provision. miners can use up the reserved belts before purchasing new fireresistant belts so long as after 5 years of use they pass a proper annual inspection. Third. the amendment would eliminate delays by some mine operators in providing supplies of breathable air in underground coal mines for miners who may become trapped as required under the MINER Act of 2006. We recently learned that some miner operators are putting refuge chambers on order. with a wait of several years in some cases. and MSHA has been treating these purchase orders as sufficient to comply with the MINER Acts breathable air requirement. In the meantime. miners are underground without the breathable air that this Congress intended them to have. At least 11 of the 12 miners of the Sago explosion. for example. did not die because of the explosion. They died because. after many hours of awaiting rescue. they ran out of air. So this provision closes an apparent loophole in the MINER Act and. ensures that breathable air is readily available to miners underground today while operators await the delivery of refuge chambers. Such air supplies can be provided via air cylinders or through boreholes to the surface pursuant to MSHA instructions. Finally. this amendment deals with the potential safety problpms posed by substance abuse in a direct and responsible fashion. Many of us have seen the recent reports about the rise of substance abuse problems in mines and mining communities. There is no doubt that the injuries. overwork and stress that miners experience can leave some of them vulnerable to abusing substances like painkillers. Now. none of the recent tragedies have been linked in any way to drug use. but we should be proactive in this area. The amendment directs the Secretary of Labor to study the problem in consultation with all parties and to impose the program if she determines it to be feasible. I urge my colleagues to pass the managers amendment. Mr. Chairman. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2008-01-16
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I would just say that. first of all. on the question. Im sure we had both the same reaction when we read the story in The Washington Post - that we had an opportunity in this legislation to address. the issue of substance abuse by those in the mining industry. You drafted your amendment and we drafted our amendment. Ours is. in fact. a study and then the implementation of the program. The gentleman from the other side of the aisle and his colleagues are always saying they dont want a solution made in Washington. They want to consult other parties. We thought we should consult the companies. We thought we should consult the States that have experience in this. the public health agencies that have some experience in this. and have the Secretary develop the best program and then enact that program with drug testing. Thats what we thought we should do. and I think it makes the most sense. There are States that have extensive experience. and rather than just somehow creating a program sent from Washington. whether those programs have drug testing or not. didnt make any sense to us. With the rest of the criticisms of the amendment. I think its sort of like maybe the "Abbey Road" album. where you guys play it backwards and it says "Paul is dead" or something. Youre reading the amendments upside down or something because thats not what the amendments do. These are good amendments. They address some concerns that the industry has raised with us. And the fact of the matter is miners are entitled to have breathable air. to have 96 hours of air underground today. When the chambers come. they will come. but in the meantime they should not be unprotected given the history of the accidents that we have witnessed in this country and the problems- that the miners have reaching those breathable supplies after the explosions. So I would encourage all of my colleagues to support this amendment. the managers amendment. by voting for it. Mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance of my time.
Date: 2008-01-16
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman. I rise in very strong support of his amendment. I think its well thought out. It recognizes the problems that were described in the article and experienced among his constituents to provide the kinds of resources for what clearly. from the narrative in the story. is a very difficult problem. encountering numerous substances. of people who are caught in very difficult situations. many of whom are struggling to stay employed. And I think the kinds of services that the gentleman provides in his amendment are .absolutely necessary. and I rise in strong support of the amendment.
Date: 2008-01-16
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I want to rise in strong support of the gentleman from Indianas amendment and commend him for his very thoughtful work and his diligence on putting this amendment together to make sure that we in fact attack the problem at hand. which was those few irresponsible miners who refused to pay their fines and that have a history of not paying. Then . also the creative use of these fines to provide better enforcement. better safety for our mine workers. I rise in strong support and ask all of our colleagues to vote "yes" on the Ellsworth amendment.
Date: 2008-01-16
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr.-Chairman. I yield myself such time I may consume. Just in response to the question that was asked. the whole point is the chambers are not available. We are asking that they put 96 hours of air available in canisters until such time as the refuge chambers are available. Currently now. apparently if you order a chamber. you- are considered to be in compliance. No new air has come into that mine. No new resources of air are available. Nothing is available to the miner. but you are in compliance with the law. We saw miners lbse their lives because they simply ran out of air. They werent killed in the explosion. They werent killed in a slide. They werent killed in a roof collapse. They ran out of air. So what we are saying is we appreciate that you have gone ahead and you have ordered the chambers because you have made the decision to put the chambers in. Until such time as they are there. we ought to provide that kind of margin of safety. One is not inconsistent with the other.
Date: 2008-01-16
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

These are air cylinders that are readily available. These are not the individualsized packs that we deal with here in terms of inspections that didnt work in the Sago Mine. Canisters of air are readily available all throughout American society. We just say you should put some in the mines so people can use them. Then let me just say the question that is raised here. currently the law allows for employer and employee involvement in safety issues. Many. many organizations and businesses have these committees. But we want those committees to remain independent. This suggests that somehow the employer should select those employees to engage in those discussions. We think that the workers ought to be able to do that and do it independently so that. in fact. they can have a true discussion about the conditions and the safety of the mines and not be establishing unilateral committees to make those determinations. The fact of the matter is. where people have these employeremployee safety committees. very often the efficiency of the mines improves. the productivity of the mines improves and the safety improves. and we think that that is the model that ought to be continued. Mr. Chairman. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2008-01-16
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman. I rise to reiterate my strong opposition to this legislation. I believe that it does eliminate most of the very important provisions in the underlying bill and the managers amendment to ensure that we increase the .margins of safety for miners and for their families. We should not give up that opportunity to this substitute. and I urge my colleagues to vote "no" on the Wilson/Kline amendment. Mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance of my time.
Date: 2008-01-17
Speaker: AL GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Thank you. Madam Chairman. I thank you. the ranking member. and all of the other Members on the other side. Members on both sides. This is a bipartisan effort. Madam Chairman. please let me dispel any notion that there is a surplus of affordable available housing in this country. In fact. in the State of Texas alone. we have a need for 437.000 units. and we are third in the Nation. New York is number two. with 528.000 units needed. California. 830.000 units. There is no surplus of available affordable housing. But were talking about the public housing units. and there is no surplus of available public housing units. Let me share a brief vignette with you. I had the privilege and honor. the preeminent privilege. if you will. of traveling to New Orleans with our subcommittee Chair. the Honorable MAXINE WATERS. While we were there. we visited the public housing units. and we actually talked to tenants. There were tenants who were pleading with us to give them the opportunity to return to what they called their homes. These were not just pieces of trash to them. These were places where they have memories. where they had hopes. where they had aspirations. And they were being denied access to property that they believed that they could live in. Now. was it to the standard that you and I my might want to live in? No. To the standards of those who live in the sweets of life. they were not. but to the standards of those who live in the streets of life. they were above standard. If youve got a choice of living on the streets or living in units that are not suitable for those who have much. you will choose to live in the units that are available to you. I regret that some of us seem to think that the best way to help people who are living in conditions that we find unacceptable is to cause them to have no place to live at all. Now. there is something wrong with that kind of thinking. And at some point. weve got to consider what the people need. and not see these as projects. I beg that we support this legislation. Keep people off the streets of life.
Date: 2008-01-17
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

I thank the gentleman for yielding. and I very much appreciate his remarks against this amendment to eliminate DavisBacon. You cannot build good solid communities on the backs of poor people. and you cant build good solid communities on the back of poor wages. poor working conditions. This is about prevailing wages. it is not about a union wage. They constantly year after year come and mischaracterize this amendment. they mischaracterize the program. But the fact of the matter is the majority in this House understands how important this provision is to working people in this country and to the comniunities in which these projects are being built. In fact. all projects in this country where we invest taxpayer money. we should get good projects. good wages and good working conditions for the people on those projects. I thank the gentleman for his statement. I rise in strong opposition to the amendment offered by Mr. KING of Iowa. Here we have a bill to reauthorize the HOPE VI program. That program provides grants to localities for the construction. rehabilitation. and. in some cases. demolition of public housing units. That work is going to be done in some of the poorest neighborhoods in this country. That work is going to be done in areas with some of the highest unemployment in this country. And what does the King amendment do? It eliminates prevailing wage requirements for this work. It gives the money to contractors who would be free to pay poverty wages and pocket the rest as profit. This amendment worsens the cycle of poverty in the very areas that need the most help. But thats not all. This is taxpayer money. What do you get when you give taxpayer money to contractors who pay poverty wages and treat their workers poorly? You get shoddy work. And you have to spend more taxpayer money to fix it later. Lets summarize: The King amendment uses taxpayer money to worsen the cycle of poverty in the poorest neighborhoods in this country. It uses taxpayer money to buy shoddy work that just increases the costs later on. Its difficult to tell who the amendment is trying to hurt the mostthe poor neighborhoods. the workers. or the taxpayers. This Amendment is outrageous and should be roundly defeated by this House.