
“We are focused on implementing the 2006 MINER Act, which provided MSHA with strong new tools to be able to accomplish this mission,” said Richard Stickler, who leads the federal mine safety agency. “S-MINER, on the other hand, would undermine these and other ongoing efforts.”
The Democrats and The United Mine Workers disagree:
“The administration has weakened or rolled back a number of existing mine safety regulations,” said Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee.
Rep. Miller added:
“Congress has been forced to act to improve mine safety because of the Bush administration’s total failure to work aggressively to keep miners safe on the job. The Bush administration has never made mine safety a priority, even going so far as to appoint former industry executives to key positions in the Mine Safety and Health Administration – a clear case of the fox guarding the henhouse. The administration has weakened or rolled back a number of existing mine safety regulations. And now, the White House is offering a series of completely baseless excuses to explain its decision to threaten a veto of this urgently-needed legislation. President Bush should stop playing politics with people’s lives and work with Congress to enact mine safety reforms that were left unaddressed by the MINER Act of 2006.”
Miller is the sponsor of the legislation, the Supplemental Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act -HR2768- For more information on mine safety, click here.
Mine Safety has been a top priority of the Education and Labor Committee for the entire year, including numerous hearings and investigations. Much of that work is reflected in H.R. 2768, “The Supplemental Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act,” which comes up for a vote tomorrow. See Chairman George Miller’s explanation of the bill in his statement during markup of the billInformation provided by THE GAVEL and SignOnSanDiego
I haven't stepped into the Presidential race debate but yesterday, Mike Huckabee made a statement I find to be rather disturbing.
"I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution. But I believe it’s a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God. And that’s what we need to do is amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards rather than trying to change God’s standards so it lines up with some contemporary view of how we treat each other and how we treat the family".
So, we're to elect a guy to take it upon himself to decide what's "God's standards"? After 7 years and 1 more to go with a President that manipulates the constitution based on what he thinks is right, I think that's plenty. This is a country based on a constitution that gives us a freedom of religion, to worship as we see fit. Not a land where a President to turn our government into a theocracy.
Here's an great article from Daily Kos