and with less industrial size coal made, the byproduct of home heating size coal will cost more now hitting those who can least afford the increase...
Posted on 07/23/2012 6:17:40 PM PDT by markomalley
Two coal companies in Pennsylvania blamed President Obama and his Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the layoffs announced last week.
“[T]he escalating costs and uncertainty generated by recently advanced EPA regulations and interpretations have created a challenging business climate for the entire coal industry,” said PBS Coals Inc. President and CEO D. Lynn Shanks in a statement on Friday, as noted by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. The company also cited weaker-than-normal demand for coal.
Shanks’ comment on the EPA came as he announced a 28 percent work force reduction. “PBS Coals Inc. and its affiliate company, RoxCoal Inc., laid off about 225 workers as part of an immediate idling of some deep and surface mines in Somerset County,” Post-Gazette added. “The company now employs 795 workers.”
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee staff issued a report last week faulting the EPA for over-regulating the industries under its control. “Over 40 EPA regulations cited by job creators as barriers to growth and expansion in the Committee’s February 2011 staff report remain a problem,” the staff report said. “EPA’s proposal to regulate coal combustion residuals (“coal ash”) usurps states’ previous role and exerts unprecedented federal control over the utility industry . . . Compliance costs range from $78-110 billion over the next 20 years while job loss estimates range from 39,000, under a low estimate, to 316,000, under a high estimate.”
General Manager Ronald Koontz, a mine manager, hit the president for waging a “war on coal seeking to destroy the coal industry and the jobs of our own employees and the livelihoods of their families.”
Koontz’ remark dovetails with those of EPA’s New England Regional Administrator Curt Spaulding, who said the EPA had adopted a policy towards the coal industry that amounted to saying “we just think those communities should just go away,” as he put it earlier this year.
“You can’t imagine how tough that was, because — you got to remember — if you go to West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and all those places, you have coal communities who depend on coal,” Spaulding said. “It is painful every step of the way.”
I wonder what the coal miners union has to say? Are they proud of backing Obama in 2008?
Election 2008 results in PA: 0bama 55% - McCain 44%
You voted for this Pennsylvania. You better change course in 2012 or you are through, along with the rest of us!
The coal unions will still give 95% of their money to Ohbummer. They could care less about their workers.
Obama told us he intended to get rid of the coal companies before he was elected president. And still they voted for him.
Yep, there were so many here that did.
Senate candidate Tom Smith needs to hammer this home. We need that Senate seat, along with the Presidency.
Yet I still see a lot of 0bamphiles around. Guess you just can’t fix stupid everywhere but lets just pray that it’s been fixed enough.
and with less industrial size coal made, the byproduct of home heating size coal will cost more now hitting those who can least afford the increase...
I hope they remember why they’re out of work and who put them there November 6th.
Looks like “disability” is all they have left. Oh well, Pelosi says they will have more time to learn how to play the guitar, paint pictures of flowers and fruit and write poems.
Swing state BTTT.
Well, shucks. We thought he was just funnin' us all. We didn't think the Messiah actually meant what he said...
D. Lynn Shanks, President and CEO of PBS Coals Inc., July 23, 2012
IIRC OB made a statement during the 2008 campaign that he would put coal companies out of business. Anyone have this quote? It was in a TV interview.
I remember that. I just don't remember exactly when or who he said it to - maybe a speach?
I can’t believe OB will campaign in any coal producing state. Might show up in Philly to visit his poll security guys at the Black Panther Hdq.
Until landowners are given legal rights, I hope all coal companies shut down.
Let’s be a little fair to the EPA, (okay maybe not), but I think the natural gas prices are having an effect too.
I loved my coal stove. Wasn’t good at getting it to last all night, but hey, nobody’s perfect.
PA Ping!
If you want on/off the PA Ping List, please freepmail me. Thanks!
The quote was made on January 18th, 2008 with the San Francisco Chronicle. It wasn’t made public by the San Francisco Chronicle until November 2, 2008.
Are we surprised they would sit on it that long?
Anyone?
Every company should lay off workers beginning in September. They can all ways make due with fewer workers.
The electorate needs to feel real, deep pain
What we're seeing here is coal getting pushed aside by a less expensive form of energy.
Not many coal mines in SF. LOL!
Because the Unions were behind him.
I hope the coal miners remember this when they vote.
You are right my FRiend
OK. Pennsylvania voters...do try to remember this on Election Day.
OK. Pennsylvania voters...do try to remember this on Election Day.
As Al Jolson once said,"You ain't seen nothing yet."
“General Manager Ronald Koontz, a mine manager, hit the president for waging a “war on coal seeking to destroy the coal industry and the jobs of our own employees and the livelihoods of their families.”
Karma is a bit** there Ronnie. How did that vote for Obama in 2008 go for you?
Didn’t the Obamanator say (and I paraphrase) he would like to run the coal industry out of business?
Couldn’t see that one coming, now could we?
This could be a really interesting election after all.
I hope every one of the miners who had the nerve to vote for our anti-American president have been laid off...and not put on disability for the rest of their lives.
Thanks markomalley.
...the Messiah...? Please tell me that quote was made sarcastically.
Will these unions ever learn?
Will women ever learn? Obama would be history but for their idiotic support.
Fracking and the resulting low prices for natural gas aren’t helping the coal industry much either.
bttt
Some of it is that but most comes from this communist that was elected by the sheep and educated idiots that wanted a leftist idiolog. Now this is what we got. A dictator that is shredding the Constitution.
Everyone who has been put out of work since the rats took over in 2006, and everyone who does not want to lose his job, should remember this when they vote.
Good and more businesses should do the same. A friend of mine is the CEO of a business. He posted election signs on company property. The candidate is a solid conservative and pro-business against a hard-left radical incumbent who never ever bothered to visit or accept a visit from one of the largest employers in the district.
After about a week the HR manager comes in and complains about the vile politicization of work and how offensive it is. She said that others felt the same way. Their major issue was that the fiscally conservative candidate was anti-abortion.
He asked her if she knew about the incumbents attitude toward business. She didn’t and hadn’t bothered. All she knew about was being pro-choice. So he forwarded her some info on the incumbent along with info on the challenger that clearly showed the one would harm their business while the latter would help. Pro-choice won’t save your job.
That silenced her. Of course, she’s not so offended as to quit, but she’s plenty ignorant and more bosses need to educate their employees that liberals kill jobs. Come to Cook County/Obamaland and see for yourself.
Every election is always about the economy - your wallet, jobs, etc. When the voters take their eye off that ball you get a Carter, Clinton and Obama. Not to overlook the foibles of GOP Presidents.
It’s the economy stupid.
I recently heard a black guest on a radio show state that it was racism keeping blacks down. I suppose he’s not aware that urban blacks elect Democrats in droves and keep them in power. IL is controlled top to bottom by Democrats. Who’s to blame, though?
IIRC OB made a statement during the 2008 campaign that he would put coal companies out of business. Anyone have this quote?
Nov 02, 2008 (clarification given to San Francisco Chronicle regarding previous Jan 2008 interview)
OBAMA: What I’ve said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else’s out there.I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year.
So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.
That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel and other alternative energy approaches.
The only thing I’ve said with respect to coal, I haven’t been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a (sic) ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it.
So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can.
It’s just that it will bankrupt them.
“Obama told us he intended to get rid of the coal companies before he was elected president. And still they voted for him.”
That is correct! He also is on record saying that his objective is to eliminate the private health insurance industry - parroting other leftists like the abysmal Jan Schakowsky and the despicable toad Barney Frank.
thanx
well, if there was a pro-business candidate who was pro-abortion and the opposite was an anti-business candidate who was anti-abortion, I would vote for the anti. For me the issue of baby-killing takes precedence over my job (I’ll admit, i’ve never been in the situation and what I stated is what I believe I would do)
My point is that the vast majority of the electorate is consistent with God's advice in the Ten Commandments. That is they are jealous, envious, weak, etc. They worship a god of their own making. Realpolitik needs to address the economic concerns of the population.
A winning economic policy is an entre into a social policy consistent with conservative goals, although I don't think we'll ever see a full out ban on abortions. On a full belly the American people will move strongly toward the Constitution. We need to get the incentives right.
” Most people wouldn’t starve or lose their job and possessions over an unknown, unborn baby.”
If you look at things on a macro level, the loss of 55+ million babies over the past 40 years has had a tremendous impact on our society.
For example:
When larger families were the norm rather than the exception, as is the case in this post Griswold, post Roe world, the care of the elderly could relatively easily be accomplished by the elderly people’s adult children. Now, rather than the expenses, both in time and in dollars, must be borne by one or two kids. That’s a whole lot different.
The cultural attitude from parents to children also has changed. Again, with fewer kids, parents are free to obsess over their one or two offspring. All of their dreams and hopes are embodied in that kid. What happens? The kid is materially spoiled and never has to share with anybody...the kid is pressured to be perfect...constant structured activity leading to obsessiveness. The kid must be a success because otherwise the parent is a failure. No second, third, our fourth chance to get it right.
And then we can look at the loss of bodies for the labor pool. We don’t have enough people, and those that we have are self serving as a norm. The result: we import aliens to do the shut work for slave wages.
While the loss of one child to abortion may not have a huge impact on society, if you look at it on the macro scale, that has done more to ruin our society than anything else. And yes, I would include, in many cases, jobs and possessions
” Most people wouldn’t starve or lose their job and possessions over an unknown, unborn baby.”
If you look at things on a macro level, the loss of 55+ million babies over the past 40 years has had a tremendous impact on our society.
For example:
When larger families were the norm rather than the exception, as is the case in this post Griswold, post Roe world, the care of the elderly could relatively easily be accomplished by the elderly people’s adult children. Now, rather than the expenses, both in time and in dollars, must be borne by one or two kids. That’s a whole lot different.
The cultural attitude from parents to children also has changed. Again, with fewer kids, parents are free to obsess over their one or two offspring. All of their dreams and hopes are embodied in that kid. What happens? The kid is materially spoiled and never has to share with anybody...the kid is pressured to be perfect...constant structured activity leading to obsessiveness. The kid must be a success because otherwise the parent is a failure. No second, third, our fourth chance to get it right.
And then we can look at the loss of bodies for the labor pool. We don’t have enough people, and those that we have are self serving as a norm. The result: we import aliens to do the shut work for slave wages.
While the loss of one child to abortion may not have a huge impact on society, if you look at it on the macro scale, that has done more to ruin our society than anything else. And yes, I would include, in many cases, jobs and possessions
I'd like to believe I'd sacrifice all of that for my moral stand against baby-killing, but I've not been put in that position to say that "that's what I did".
Good analysis and we agree. We’re on the same team as regards abortion. My only point is the shortsightedness and low self-esteem of the average voter limits the ability of conservative candidates to win on socially conservative issues alone. We’re too easily painted as extreme and our ideas marginalized.
On the other-hand imagine if the three of us ran on a pro-growth, pro-jobs platform. That could be a winning ticket even in many Dem areas. Now we implement our policies and get growth going again along with jobs.
The voter, seeing the pocketbook issue being addressed, is now grateful. Over time we would then be able to implement socially conservative initiatives over time. Those same initiatives would improve pocketbook issues by reforming welfare, strengthening families and reducing out of wedlock births. This would all act to keep conservatives in power for generations.
We tend to be too all or nothing. I live in a heavily Democratic area. I work hard to get a little bit each time using moral suasion and publicity to move the conservative agenda forward. I never get everything, but in bits and pieces I’ve succeeded greatly.
As for abortion I don’t believe that God would allow those innocents to suffer the crimes of their parents. So despite my disgust for abortion, I believe that long term we can only hope to ban late term abortions and reduce the number by implementing adoption reforms. People throughout history have always had abortions. That’s not a rationalization for an evil, just the reality of this world. Remember that the god of this world is the Devil.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
