Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, and Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval at right, address supporters during a campaign rally at a local business, Tuesday May 29, 2012.
By Anjeanette Damon (contact) 
Sunday, Oct. 14, 2012 | 2 a.m.
Miners set off a blast at the PABCO Gypsum mine near Lake Mead during an earth science workshop for teachers Wednesday, April 4, 2012. The workshops are sponsored by the Nevada Mining Association and the Nevada Division of Minerals.
Sun Archives
In an op-ed printed last week in the Elko Daily Free Press, Gov. Brian Sandoval took President Barack Obama to task for proposed mining taxes he said would “be devastating for those of us in Nevada.”
It’s a theme Republican Mitt Romney’s campaign has played on repeatedly in an effort to continue galvanizing the rural vote.
In short, when Obama campaigned in Nevada four years ago, he promised to protect the mining industry from regulation and taxes that would stunt its ability to generate jobs in rural Nevada. Now, Obama’s administration has proposed a 5 percent royalty on the mining of public lands and a dirt tax to fund reclamation efforts.
Romney’s campaign was quick to call Obama a flip-flopper.
But what about Romney? What’s his position on the 1872 mining law that gives mining companies royalty-free access to public lands?
Republicans and Democrats largely agree that the 1872 law, passed at a time when the federal government wanted to encourage expansion of the fledgling industry, is outmoded and no longer fits an industry dominated by large multinational corporations.
Unlike Obama, Romney—and his campaign—has been consistent in answering questions about his approach to the 1872 hard rock mining law. But that doesn’t mean Romney has actually provided any kind of details about what he would do as president if confronted with a reform bill.
In 2007, Romney gave the Reno Gazette-Journal a rather nondescript answer to the question.
“The last bill on mining was from, what? 1872? Signed by Ulysses Grant. There’s been some suggestion we should look at that again,” he said. “That is something you want to do in discussion with people who understand the business and are closest to it.
“I don’t have a series of changes I would make to mining laws. I do want to make sure we don’t have any individuals with a bone to pick or some kind of a radical agenda in some way hurting the mining industry.”
This summer, when the Romney campaign began pointing out Obama’s inconsistencies on the subject, the Sun asked for details on his approach to hard rock mining. The question was bumped up the campaign chain to the policy people and apparently lost in the busy campaign shuffle at the time.
But it was early and the potential existed for an interview with the candidate himself, so it wasn’t pursued.
This election cycle, however, has been notable for the sheer dearth—so far anyway—of presidential campaign visits to rural counties. Four years ago, both tickets visited Elko, Carson City and other towns. This year, neither ticket has ventured very far out of Las Vegas or Reno.
One more thing neither presidential candidate has done much of this year: talk to Nevada newspaper reporters.
Romney last talked to the Sun the week of the presidential primary debate in Las Vegas one year ago. That’s also the last time he did an interview with the Las Vegas Review-Journal.
He hasn’t spoken with the Reno Gazette-Journal either.
Obama has thrown a few bones to the print press, doing a brief roundtable with a group of rural newspaper reporters on a trip to Reno this summer.
So, so far, there's been no opportunity to ask Romney what he would do as president with hard rock mining. That means reporters have been reliant on the campaign’s policy advisors and spokespeople for an answer on such topics.
And on mining, they stayed true to Romney’s 2007 form.
“Gov. Romney is open to reforming the law, but unlike the President, wouldn’t propose taxes or policies that would threaten the competitiveness of our mining industry or hamper job creation,” spokesman Mason Harrison said in a statement on Thursday. “Mining has been one of the few bright spots in Nevada’s economy and it would be a mistake to single that industry out with actions that would cost jobs when Nevada is facing an unemployment rate above 12 percent.
“Gov. Romney will work with Congress to implement pro-growth policies that will make our businesses more competitive and help get Americans back to work.”
Consistent? Yes. Detailed? No.
It should be clear now that the mining companies will have a friend in Romney, and an unfair business advantage on taxation if he wins. He just doesn't want to spell it out for us, though he likely is telling a much different story to the miners. His devious manner is his one consistency.
OldPSU, Yeah right, Obama is such an enemy to mining. Don't let your partisanship blind you. Big money affects both people.
Is it November yet?
Romney is "vauge" on mining just like he is on everything else, because details are for democrats.
Yeh Markey details sure are for Democrats. Watch the debates lately? Seems Biden has his details side ways and Obama forgot his details.
goes not have position on anything
If the people of Nevada will remember right we elected our Governor pretty much the same way.
Short on details and facts. He could not be held to much that way and that is just what we have got, not much from him.
The devil is always in the details and if you don't give the people details they can not beat you with them later.
That is how elections are won these days.
Comment removed by moderator. Off Topic
The big mine's in Nevada are mostly owned by Foreign Countries mostly Canadian ones
"It should be clear now that the mining companies will have a friend in Romney"
LOL
Yes, yes, yes, yes......Nevadan employees that have mining related jobs will have a friend in Romney.
As oppose they will have an enemy in Obama who seeks to raise FEDERAL taxes on mining operations.
Thank you for making that very clear to all us.
We appreciate it.
The man doesn't give specific details on anything. All he does is speak in vague generalities and spout off republican talking points. His plan is to sprinkle magic dust all over it and somehow all this countries problems will be cured.
The best thing the federal government can do with the land is deed it to the state. There is no reason for the fed to own over half of the western states. The feds don't own this kind of acreage in the East or mid West. Turn the land over to the states and let the people decide how to operate the land.
Would appear that the Romney campaign gave this reported a straight answer to a question that is too complex to be repeated in reporters' one line zingers.
What we do know about the situation is that if we keep Harry Reid as the de facto President, we'll keep giving away this country's precious and very limited resources to foreign corporations in exchange for campaign contributions.
I'll take my chances that Romeny will approach it with an open mind whereas Obama will do EXACTLY what Harry Reid tells him to do - in this and every other matter.