a right to mine it if the land is properly reclaimed” (Montrie 2003: 119). Of course, the rhetorical power of his statement is contingent upon the implementation of reclamation,” “proper a practice that is vehemently contested until today. Surprisingly, George Titler’s words sound as if they could have come out of the mouth of a coal industry executive—not the mouth of a labor leader. The UMWA as Corporate Ally? The UMWA, at times, seems merely to have been an agent of the coal industry. The union’s inability to take strong stands on critical issues like MTR and its inability to organize mines, particularly those run by Massey (now Alpha Natural Resources), has drawn criticism from rank-and-file members and coalfield residents generally (McNeil 2011: 88-89). In the summer of 2014, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency held public hearings in regard to the EPA’s proposed power plant rule—which, if implemented, would raise carbon dioxide emissions standards for fossil fuel-powered electricity generating stations. The rule would reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants by 30 percent by 2030 (Ward 2014). Environmental activists claimed that reducing carbon dioxide emissions from power plants in the U.S. is critical to the long-term survival of our species on the planet, as average global temperatures are steadily inching upward (Hopey et al. 2014). The UMWA organized a demonstration in Pittsburgh, PA, one of four EPA hearing locations across the country. The UMWA arranged bus transportation for thousands of miners and their families—on approximately 70 buses—from West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Ohio, Kentucky, and Alabama (Ward 2014). UMWA president, Cecil Roberts, echoing West Virginia governor, Ray Tomblin, argued that the proposed carbon dioxide rule would destroy mining families across West Virginia and other coal-producing regions (Archer 2014). Not only would jobs vanish, Roberts and Tomblin argued, but the cost of
a right to mine it if the land is properly reclaimed” (Montrie 2003: 119). Of course, the rhetorical power of his statement is contingent upon the implementation of “proper reclamation,” a practice that is vehemently contested until today. Surprisingly, George Titler’s words sound as if they could have come out of the mouth of a coal industry executive—not the mouth of a labor leader. The UMWA as Corporate Ally? The UMWA, at times, seems merely to have been an agent of the coal industry. The union’s inability to take strong stands on critical issues like MTR and its inability to organize mines, particularly those run by Massey (now Alpha Natural Resources), has drawn criticism from rank-and-file members and coalfield residents generally (McNeil 2011: 88-89). In the summer of 2014, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency held public hearings in regard to the EPA’s proposed power plant rule—which, if implemented, would raise carbon dioxide emissions standards for fossil fuel-powered electricity generating stations. The rule would reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants by 30 percent by 2030 (Ward 2014). Environmental activists claimed that reducing carbon dioxide emissions from power plants in the U.S. is critical to the long-term survival of our species on the planet, as average global temperatures are steadily inching upward (Hopey et al. 2014). The UMWA organized a demonstration in Pittsburgh, PA, one of four EPA hearing locations across the country. The UMWA arranged bus transportation for thousands of miners and their families—on approximately 70 buses—from West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Ohio, Kentucky, and Alabama (Ward 2014). UMWA president, Cecil Roberts, echoing West Virginia governor, Ray Tomblin, argued that the proposed carbon dioxide rule would destroy mining families across West Virginia and other coal-producing regions (Archer 2014). Not only would jobs vanish, Roberts and Tomblin argued, but the cost of
WPSAPaperSpring2015.docx