Signature Sponsor
The Struggle for Coal Miners' Healthcare and Pension



May 1, 2017Your time and effort finds large bipartisan support both in chambers, yet occurred up by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. McConnell has repeatedly opposed shoring in the pension fund. Rather, he and many other conservatives are just prepared to provide funding to deal with the health care funding shortages.

Yet this Friday, greater than 22,000 upon the market union coal miners in seven states whose former companies went bankrupt in the last couple of years will likely lose their health care benefits if Congress is not able to agree with a lasting or temporary fix.

For many decades, with a lot of union miners adding towards the funds, the care and pension trust funds were adequately funded although several decisions strained resources from the beginning. Over time both union trust funds have began to incur a structural deficit for a number of reasons.

For just one, a little-known provision in the Affordable Care Act greatly facilitated use of black lung benefits for coal miners as well as their spouses. Repealing the ACA would roll back these benefits, although other legislation addressing the problem continues to be introduced. It might also affect eligibility for a lot of miners regarding State medicaid programs and also the ACA marketplaces.

Throughout the 2016 presidential campaign, then-candidate Trump frequently expressed his support for coal miners as well as their communities. Voters within the country’s old mining parts of Appalachia rewarded these promises with overwhelming electoral support.

During the last few years, legislation has been repeatedly introduced to maintain a lasting resolution towards the looming insolvency from the coal miners’ healthcare and pension trust funds. Most lately, the Miners Protection Act of 2017 (S.175) created by Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia seeks to create in shortfalls both in funds.

Furthermore, of individuals miners remaining, a vast majority aren’t union miners. Consequently, there are just about 10,000 union coal miners left to pay for in to these funds, while roughly 12 occasions as numerous are presently drawing healthcare and pension benefits.

For just one, employment within the coal industry continues to be shrinking continuously in the last couple of decades, from greater than 850,000 within the 1920s to about 50,000 in the finish of 2016.

Intervention by the us government isn’t free. The Congressional Budget Office has scored a previous form of the balance and pegged direct spending at US$2.2 billion for that healthcare trust fund and $1.4 billion for that pension trust fund over ten years.

It’s time to look for a permanent solution for coal miners, their own families as well as their communities.

Even though the role of coal in American society has reduced for many years, the us government has lengthy recognized its importance with this country’s economic development. The bipartisan support for the Miners Protection Act, guaranteeing both healthcare and pension benefits, within the frequently-polarized U.S. Congress is suggestive of this recognition. However, so far Republican leadership in Congress has was when it comes to a lasting fix.

In the centre of the present scenario is a contract between the us government and also the US Coal Miners of the usa dating from 1946. Confronted with a number of strikes across different industries in 1945 and 1946, President Truman, consistent with a lengthy type of federal interventions within the coal industry, took control of the nation’s coal mines. The conflict was ultimately settled by the Krug-Lewis Agreement of 1946 which, amongst other things, established healthcare and pension benefits for union miners.

The problem works as a harbinger for more troubles for coal miners as well as their healthcare and pension benefits. Furthermore, the problem could indicate troubles ahead for other union-run pension and health care insurance options.

As result, both healthcare and pension benefits are no longer financially sustainable without government intervention, potentially affecting 120,000 upon the market miners as well as their families.

These miners would become qualified for State medicaid programs or subsidized ACA marketplace coverage for around $500 million for the us government and another $110 million for states over ten years. Other medication is qualified for Medicare. However, costs to individual miners would unquestionably increase, potentially considerably so.

More to the point, the long-term viability of UMWA trust funds for all union miners as well as their families is on the line. As the threat to miners’ healthcare benefits is immediate, the projections for that pension fund have indicated that it’ll also fall into insolvency over the following couple of years.


Other Legislation Affecting Coal Miners

Additionally to the point of solvency of miners’ healthcare and pension benefits, miners’ safety and health may potentially suffer by a few other legislation presently into consideration in Congress.

The Truly Amazing Recession irritated the problem. Confronted with mounting obligation and declining sales, a few of the nation’s largest coal companies declared bankruptcy and shed their obligations for their former employees.

I study healthcare policy at West Virginia College. With close to 30,000 upon the market union coal miners, West Virginia, a condition already struggling with the dramatic alterations in the coal industry, could be particularly negatively impacted by the failure to locate a means to fix this problem.

Current Legislation: Healthcare and Pension Benefits

Others, like the conservative Heritage Foundation, have contended the intervention by the us government was just temporary. Furthermore, they argued that the UMWA has frequently violated the agreement and pressed for changes that faster the present funding crisis.

There’s a debate around the nature from the original federal commitment. Now you ask , whether the us government designed a permanent dedication to coal miners as well as their families, as the United Mine Workers of America argue. Ultimately, this could entail the us government becoming a payer of last measure should coal companies and unions be not able to sustain their expenditure to coal miners.

Unquestionably, the problem is complex. However, evidence appears to favor the previous interpretation because the agreement was frequently reaffirmed by the us government (for instance, with the Coal Act of 1992 and also the Coal Act of 2006).

As the Dole Commission place it: “The UMWA Health insurance and Retirement Funds is really as much a creature of presidency because it is of collective bargaining … In ways, the initial Krug-Lewis agreement predisposed, otherwise predetermined, the machine that evolved.”

Everything is a repeat from the one coal miners were faced with just four several weeks ago. Not able to locate a permanent solution in December to lack of funds to pay for health advantages to those upon the market miners, Congress chosen a brief compromise.

Furthermore, the Robert C. Byrd Mine Safety Protection Act of 2017 (S. 854 and H.R. 1903) seeks to enhance mine safety and miners’ health. Whilst not addressing the immediate insolvency issue, it supports the possibility to reduce healthcare costs for future retirees.


Continuing to Move Forward

Coal mining is among the most harmful professions in today’s world. Even if in a position to retire, coal miners leave behind their profession with significant health impairments and shorter existence expectancies than other Americans.


If Congress does not act, the best impact is going to be around the 22,000 miners whose healthcare benefits are going to expire. They are so-known as “orphaned” miners as their companies have declared personal bankruptcy in the last many years.