A year ago, just before President Joe Biden left office, the federal government issued a new rule for coal mine operators. It mandated that if mine operators are going to insure themselves, they have to prove they can cover 100% of the future costs of black lung disease if their workers contract it.
It was an attempt to solve an ongoing problem. The federal government requires disability payments for black lung treatment or, in the event of death, payments to family members. But coal companies were going bankrupt, and some ran out of money to pay black lung benefits to their miners. That shifts the burden for disability payments to the federal Black Lung Disability Trust Fund.
The trust fund is supposed to be funded by a tax on coal sales, but it regularly has to borrow money from the U.S. Treasury.
A Government Accountability Office report showed that between 2014 and 2016, three coal companies who claimed they could insure themselves went bankrupt. As a result, $865 million of payments for more than 3,000 black lung victims were shifted to the trust fund.
For advocates of black lung victims, the 2024 rule requiring proof of 100% self-insurance was a way to keep coal companies responsible for the lifelong diseases miners got at work.
"We know what happens when coal companies under-insure their black lung liability -- taxpayers end up footing the bill,” said Rebecca Shelton with the Appalachian Citizens Law Center. “Worse, if we don't hold companies accountable for paying their employees' black lung benefits, then what incentive do they have to prevent their employees from getting this horrendous disease?"
Last week, Rep. Bobby Scott and Rep. Ilhan Omar, both Democrats, said they have reason to believe the Department of Labor under President Donald Trump isn’t following the rule.
Shelton said any failure to uphold the self-insurance standards would be “fiscally irresponsible and truly unacceptable.”
As minority members of a workforce oversight committee, Scott and Omar sent a formal letter to the labor agency last week, requesting answers and documents detailing if and how the agency is carrying out the rule.
“There are essentially rumors that you’re not requiring posting of appropriate collateral,” Scott said in an interview. “Are you or are you not? We haven’t heard, they haven’t answered and so we suspect that they’re not.”
Scott said because he and his colleague are in the minority party, they likely won't get enough support to subpoena answers from the Department of Labor. He hopes, however, the administration will cooperate and provide more information by Dec. 8.
The Department of Labor did not respond to a request for comment for this story.
