Posted on 01/04/2006 5:14:08 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
by Mark Finkelstein
January 4, 2006 - 07:58
Once in a while, it happens. TV serves up human drama in real time. It happened on this morning's Today show when the bereaved son of one of the Sago miners confronted the governor of West Virginia over allegedly lax safety enforcement in the mine.
Matt Lauer began with a stand-up interview, at the disaster site, of WV Governor Joe Manchin. Lauer then brought in John Bennett, the adult son of Jim Bennett, one of the miners who died, who stood on Lauer's other side.
Bennett described the history of violations in the mine. Lauer turned to Manchin to inquire about the violations, and Manchin launched into his response when Bennett took matters into his own hands. He spoke across Lauer directly to Manchin: "with all these roof falls and everything that has happened over the multiple months, not weeks, months, that this has happened," Manchin began to reply when Bennett again cut him off: "and they still send men in there?"
It was a poignant moment, as one's heart when out to the son. At the same time, it was an ultimate political moment: a politician on live national TV confronted by a bereaved constituent suggesting the governor's responsibiity for the death of his father and others.
Manchin remained calm and, without directly responding to Bennett's question, described the seals in the mine that had been blown out.
Lauer followed with an apt question to Manchin of his own: "when the average person across the country hears that this mine had been cited for 46 violations as recently as late December, it is hard to understand why it was open for business on Monday when that explosion occured."
Manchin replied by stating that even one fatality is too many, that mining is an inherently dangerous operation, and by mentioning that his own family had suffered a mining death [his uncle was killed in an infamous 1968 disaster in which 78 miners died]. "I know exactly how the families feel. I've been there."
Lauer turned back to Bennett, who seemed on the verge of putting another question to Manchin, when Lauer deflected it, asking Bennett "what questions would you like to put to the mine operators?" Bennett paused, palpably changing directions, and suggested that, for fear of losing their jobs, the men were afraid to speak out about the unsafe mine conditions. Bennett decried the absence of the United Mine Workers to protect the men in the non-union Sago mine.
Bennett conducted himself with dignity, as did Manchin, who is clearly in the crisis of his political life. There were no winners or losers, simply a spontaneous human moment, brought to us in real time.
Preeshate the info.
Thank you for the information. The direction that a thread will take is often interesting and frequently unpredictable. And as your post demonstrates, FReepers collectively possess a huge amount of knowledge on a very broad array of issues.
---THANKS--you are of those on the thread who knows what he is talking about---
"Preeshate"
Took me a while, but I got it. Sounds like W at a press conf ;-)
Tha Manchin family is a very close, big, powerful family in WV from a very small mining town. I somewhat disagree with your assessment. If, heaven forbid, anything happened to my BIL's, my children would be absolutely devastated, and the closest uncle is 2 hours away, so he isn't a surrogate father. He is just so much fun for my kids when they see him. My children are young, and the loss would be confusing and horrible, not to mention watching their cousins go through losing a dad and the rest of the family's loss, as well. Manchin's loss was in '68, he was 21, watching his cousins (I am assuming because it is a big family). It would be horrible. The mine accident was a terrible explosion with 78 killed, the entire town would have been devastated. I am sure he lost more than an uncle, probably friends and fathers of friends.
MSHA makes OSHA look like grade school
It seems to me that mining is an industry where safety violations are usually minor, widespread, and commonplace. In our law firm, we have a paper mill as a client, and they get 10 violations every time an inspector walks through the plant. But the 10 violations are extraordinarily minor, and the sum of the fine - if there is one at all - is rarely above $2,000. Rather, the safety inspections are just used as a way to check up on manufacturers, keep them on their toes, and make sure they're not doing any thing really stupid.
Wasn't he? Didn't he hire Israel to blow up the tunnel? Just like Reagan was resposible for AIDS by personally raping and infecting men across the nation. [/sarcasm]
MSHA has a department which handles anonymous complaints from workers/whistleblowers.
--well put--
I don't doubt it. Then again, obviously not all violations are minor. The son here alleged that there had been numerous roof cave-ins in recent times at this mine. If that's indeed true, don't know if they were the result of safety violations or not, but something obviously led to a major disaster. It might have just been bad, unavoidable luck, but perhaps not.
You can take the boy out of Bama, but ....
All the good it did em 6' under. I am no union sympathizer, but if you are breathing and ever dealth with the government agencies responsible for safety enforcement, you know damned well there aren't enough of em to enforce the rules.
Mines and other heavy industry are definately a place where the Union still has a purpose and a need. Yes they have gotten the safety laws on the books, but enforcement of them and a complaint path for issues through the Union definately is better than to some understaffed agency beaurocrats.
There are two types of violation for which MSHA issues citations. The frequent, non-serious violations are over things like "frayed wires on an extention cord", or "cover not replaced on electrical junction box" or "monthly inspection card not punched on fire extinguisher". Those kinds of violations are hit with small fines and usually taken care of right there as the MSHA inspector watches.
The second kind of violation is called a "significant and substantial" (S&S) violation. Those are the biggies. They hit a mine with thousands of dollars of fines over S&S citations. Those get serious attention, and they are rare. An S&S citation is given for things which are an immediate hazard or which have been repeatedly ignored after previous warnings and citations. Leaving energized, high-voltage wires exposed in a traffic area or operating equipment with safety interlocks disabled or with guards removed are examples of things MSHA will smack you hard for.
One other thing is falsifying records. If you "fudge" a safety inspection form, checking off inspections you haven't actually performed, you will PERSONALLY go to jail. The company is not even ALLOWED to defend you for it.
MSHA does not mess around with miner safety. Not even a little.
I give it 48 hours before West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller produces a handwritten note to himself regarding his concerns over the safety conditions of this mine.
Don't I know it. I bet its already begun.
Once upon a time, life and death happened without a news camera stuck in everyone's face 24-7, ad nauseum. Those were better times.
Thanks for a bit of levity!! LOL!!
Hey, where is the champion of the little people anyway? Still on holiday break in the south of France?
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.