Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, May 27, 1993 TAG: 9305270229
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A2 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: Associated Press
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Medium
"As far as we're concerned, it can only get worse," said American Mining Congress spokesman Keith Knoblock.
The Senate passed its industry-supported bill Tuesday. It would impose a 2 percent royalty on gold and other hardrock minerals that may now be taken from federal lands without any royalty payment to the government.
The House bill, sponsored by Rep. Nick Rahall, D-W.Va., calls for an 8 percent royalty and tougher environmental restrictions. Industry officials believe something along those lines could well emerge from the House.
"It's a distressing prospect," Knoblock said. He said the real battle could end up in a House-Senate conference committee formed to draw up a compromise version.
The Senate bill, sponsored by Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, cleared on a voice vote despite critics, led by Sen. Dale Bumpers, D-Ark., who said it was too weak but mostly held their fire until the conference committee.
Sen. Bennett Johnston, D-La., called the Craig bill the "ticket to conference."
But environmentalists worried that the Senate's position could undermine efforts to get a tougher bill through the House.
"It's like we're standing at the window of the maternity ward and they just held up the baby but we're not sure its ours," said Phil Hocker, president of the Mineral Policy Center. Depending on the conference negotiations "makes us very nervous."
Anna Aurilio, spokeswoman for U.S. Public Interest Research Group, called the Craig bill a "sham mining reform bill." She said senators who agreed with that assessment shirked their responsibility by not fighting the bill now.
The Craig bill drew immediate criticism from Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt as providing too little protection against abuses under a mining law enacted in 1872.
by CNB