To the long commentary suggesting that Obama/Biden would be better for coal mining jobs, I suggest he pay a little closer attention to their economic plan, as it will kill coal and a bunch of other industries. D’s have been floggin capitalism as the source of current economic pain, hoping to get Americans to adopt that wonderful program that has decimated European economies and the former Soviet Union, called socialism. If that’s what people want, they should be prepared for 15% unemployment, like the current state in those countries, and long-term economic stagnation. Carter’s brilliant economists had us on that path, until Reagan and Volker righted the ship. I’d rather not get on that sinking vessel again.

Everyone now says we cannot develop solar and wind are the same people who said we cannot make it to the moon or cure polio. We will see who is right in 10 years!!

Biden should have said, “Look, they are not creating jobs in Ohio, what they are doing is living off of government grants and subsidies. If those government favors disappeared so would those great green jobs. In fact because we have to subsidize solar, wind, and other feel good industries it actually costs us jobs. Why? Look, because it forces money from taxpayers and businesses to go to these programs instead of more productive businesses that don’t need government support to be profitable. And who knows how that money could have been spent? Look, some private sector inventors might have used that it to discover any number of great new products that would create new jobs or save companies money. But we’ll never know because that money is tied up in subsidies to unprofitable projects like solar panels and wind farms.”

But don’t hold your breath waiting for that.

Money Man

John McCain has been on the attack against the coal industry for years, starting with legislation he proposed in 2003–Senate Bill 139, the Climate Stewardship Act of 2003–that would have just about wiped out the coal industry in the United States.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration released an analysis of S. 139 in May, 2004, which said the reductions in coal production under the McCain legislation was estimated to be 78 percent by 2025. Since it takes coal miners to produce coal, that would mean a drastic reduction in employment, most of which would have fallen heavily on more labor-intensive mines like we have in Appalachia.

But Sen. McCain was just getting warmed up. He teamed up with Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) just last year and proposed climate change legislation–Senate Bill 280–that once again took a meat-axe approach to Appalachian coal. In that bill, McCain specifically targeted Appalachian coal production for cuts of 30 percent or more, while encouraging production of coal from Wyoming, according to an analysis done of the legislation by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Both Obama and McCain have proposed a variety of solutions to dealing with energy issues. They both say that they want to reduce reliance on foreign sources of energy and build an infrastructure in America that relies on a mix of sources to meet the ever-expanding energy needs of our nation, while at the same time reducing greenhouse gases.

But the devil is in the details, and once again Sen. McCain doesn’t measure up when it comes to the potential for coal–our nation’s most abundant energy resource–to continue to be the major contributor to meeting our future energy needs.

The kicker of McCain’s energy plan is to build 45 new nuclear plants across America by 2025, the first wave of 100 new nuclear plants he foresees. The negative impact on coal production and jobs from these plants will be extremely significant. And let’s face it–no matter what happens with respect to climate change over the next 50 to 100 years, the waste generated by a nuclear plant tomorrow will still be deadly to all life 10,000 years from now. Our distant descendants will likely be worrying about staying warm during the next ice age about then.

With the coming development of clean coal technologies like carbon capture and storage (CCS), America is on the brink of being able to use coal to generate energy without contributing any more greenhouse gases to the environment. Sen. McCain pays lip service to CCS, but the record shows that coal has a very limited future in John McCain’s vision of America.

Sen. Barack Obama, on the other hand, is from a coal state and clearly understands the long-term role coal can play in our nation’s energy future. He has pledged to fund development of CCS technology so that it can be deployed as soon as possible. He has said that America is the “Saudi Arabia of coal” and that we ought to be working as hard as we can to figure out how to use it for decades to come.

So the choice for coal miners, their families, their neighbors and everyone living in the coalfield communities throughout the coalfields of the U.S. Barack Obama is for the long-term future of your job and John McCain is not. Keep that in mind when you vote on Nov. 4.