Las Vegas Sun

May 28, 2012

Currently: 88° | Complete forecast | Log in

Senate Democratic whip to try to reverse House mining vote

Sunday, July 18, 1999 | 2:44 a.m.

RENO, Nev. - Sen. Harry Reid, the Democratic whip from mining-rich Nevada, is rallying Western lawmakers to try to reverse a rare victory environmentalists scored over mining interests last week in the House.

Reid said he'll oppose the effort by Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt and Democratic allies in Congress to enforce stricter limits on waste sites at hard-rock mines through the administration's new interpretation of the 1872 Mining Law.

"Secretary Babbitt is attempting to circumvent Congress to reform mining law through regulation and I am not prepared to let that happen," Reid said.

Like other natural resource issues, the dispute headed to the Senate floor as early as this week has the potential to divide Western Democrats who count on political support from environmentalists and union workers as well as homestate businesses.

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said last week she would lead the floor fight to uphold the new waste limits.

"We intend to fight long and hard and hold that Interior bill up until we can make the Senate do the right thing," she said.

Reid insists otherwise.

A senior member of the Appropriations Committee, he has been at odds with the Clinton administration on a number of mining fronts, from tougher regulations proposed at the Bureau of Land Management to the proposed sale of gold reserves at the International Monetary Fund.

He inserted special language in a spending bill this spring blocking the BLM from issuing new rules until the National Academy of Sciences completes a review of existing law at the end of this month.

The new dispute centers on an Interior Department ruling requiring hard-rock mining companies using public lands to limit the size of their waste dumps to five acres per 20-acre claim.

House Democrats and moderate Republicans joined forces on a 273-151 vote last week requiring miners to obey that ruling - an interpretation of the 1872 law that governs mining for gold and other hard-rock minerals on federal lands.

But a version of the Interior Department spending bill approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee would let companies ignore the ruling.

Industry leaders say five-acre waste sites are too small for modern mining techniques, which use chemicals like cyanide on vast piles of rock from open-pit mines.

Environmentalists say it's the first time the federal government has tried to enforce any conservation measures in the 127-year-old law, which lets companies purchase federal lands for $2.50 an acre or lease them for $100 annually per 20-acre claim.

"Mining companies have received a free lunch for over a century," said Stephen D'Esposito, president of the Mineral Policy Center, an environmental group based in Washington.

Reid, aligned with Republican Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho, said he's open to looking at changes in the law but that the Clinton administration has no business rewriting the law itself.

"We need to reform the 1872 mining law but any reform must involve all those concerned, not just the Department of Interior, as in the case of the solicitor's opinion," he said.

An aide to Reid said he was confident they would prevail in the Senate and later in a House-Senate conference committee that will have to work out any differences in the legislation passed by the two houses.

"From what I understand, they had a problem making a case for mining in the House. We'll do a better job in the Senate," David Cherry said.

Nevada is the third-leading producer of gold in the world, behind South Africa and Australia. But more than 1,000 miners have been laid off in the past 18 months due primarily to slumping gold prices.

Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., said he was working with Reid and Sen. Richard Bryan, D-Nev., as well as House leadership to make sure their side ultimately prevails in the conference committee.

"If allowed to stand, the Interior Department's ruling will render the Mining Law virtually meaningless," Gibbons said.

"It will shut down all hard-rock mining operations and projects representing thousands of jobs and billions of dollars of investment in the West."

archive

Most Popular