The politics of mining and resource extraction

[Craziaskowboi]

I read in another topic that "corn is more Democrat than wheat, and wheat is more Democrat than cattle." What I'm curious to know is, where would mining and resource extraction fall on this spectrum? I'm thinking it'd be over to the right with the cattle, because most hard-core environmentalists tend to be Democrats, and people who work in mining and resource extraction see the Democrat environmental platform as a threat to their livelihood. Correct me if I'm wrong, though.

[Asian Nazi]

Oil and natural gas extraction regions are some of the most Republican parts of the country.  Check out Gillette, Wyoming.  Historically mining regions were Democrat but with the decline of labor unions they have swung hard to the right. 

[Ban my account ffs!]

Steel is traditionally Democratic but plastic is traditionally Republican.  Increasingly, the coal areas are Republican but the ore areas remain Democratic even as they fade away.

[Hydera]

Oil and natural gas extraction regions are some of the most Republican parts of the country.  Check out Gillette, Wyoming.  Historically mining regions were Democrat but with the decline of labor unions they have swung hard to the right. 

Natural Gas areas have traditionally been Republican leaning. Oil areas used to be very dependent on regional patterns as ND was GOP but Texas and Louisiana used to be democrat leaning but shifted towards the GOP.

Coal mining regions used to be traditionally democrat leaning until the rise of environmentalism caused a large backlash in favor of the GOP.

Areas with Energy extractive industries are definitely not going to be anything but strong GOP for the near future as the democrats are now firmly in favor of environmentalist policies.

[Asian Nazi]

Coal mining regions used to be traditionally democrat leaning until the rise of environmentalism caused a large backlash in favor of the GOP.

Areas with Energy extractive industries are definitely not going to be anything but strong GOP for the near future as the democrats are now firmly in favor of environmentalist policies.

No, it's because of labor unions.  Check out how mining regions in other western democracies vote.  In America, you can draw a perfect trendline between the decline of labor unions and the decline of the Democratic vote in these regions.  In countries where labor unions are still powerful, historical mining regions vote for the left-wing party.  Environmentalism doesn't help, but I think your cause and effect are reversed.

[jimrtex]

Coal mining regions used to be traditionally democrat leaning until the rise of environmentalism caused a large backlash in favor of the GOP.

Areas with Energy extractive industries are definitely not going to be anything but strong GOP for the near future as the democrats are now firmly in favor of environmentalist policies.

No, it's because of labor unions.  Check out how mining regions in other western democracies vote.  In America, you can draw a perfect trendline between the decline of labor unions and the decline of the Democratic vote in these regions.  In countries where labor unions are still powerful, historical mining regions vote for the left-wing party.  Environmentalism doesn't help, but I think your cause and effect are reversed.

It is not so much the decline of labor unions, but rather the decline in the population involved in mineral extraction, through mechanization.

[Asian Nazi]

It is not so much the decline of labor unions, but rather the decline in the population involved in mineral extraction, through mechanization.

No, it's the decline of labor unions.  Mechanization definitely helped cause the decline of organized labor, but it was political action that killed them.  Like I said, take a look at other western countries with mining regions and see how they vote.  There's one thing that makes America different here, and it isn't environmentalism or mechanization.

[jimrtex]

It is not so much the decline of labor unions, but rather the decline in the population involved in mineral extraction, through mechanization.

No, it's the decline of labor unions.  Mechanization definitely helped cause the decline of organized labor, but it was political action that killed them.  Like I said, take a look at other western countries with mining regions and see how they vote.  There's one thing that makes America different here, and it isn't environmentalism or mechanization.

Where are these mining regions in the United States?

[Hydera]

It is not so much the decline of labor unions, but rather the decline in the population involved in mineral extraction, through mechanization.

No, it's the decline of labor unions.  Mechanization definitely helped cause the decline of organized labor, but it was political action that killed them.  Like I said, take a look at other western countries with mining regions and see how they vote.  There's one thing that makes America different here, and it isn't environmentalism or mechanization.

http://www.cbsnews.com/campaign2000results/state/poll_wvop-.html


50% of Labor union members in West Virginia back in 2000 voted for Bush over Gore who got 48%.

Labor union members in mining states have soured towards the democrats because of environmentalism as a growing concern among-st the Democratic Party.

[DINGO Joe]

It should be noted that many of the energy states mentioned have very small populations, Wyoming, North Dakota, West Virginia, Alaska.  Oklahoma and Louisiana are somewhat larger though they've both lost congressional districts over the last decades.  The smallness of states does effect coal as they're very dependent on populated states to use a product that tends to be very unpopular outside of coal mining regions and has competitive alternatives.  Hence Montana sending a delegation to Washington state begging them not to shutdown their portion of the Coalstrip power plant.

Texas of course is the exception. It's the biggest producer of oil and gas (by far).   It's also where the corporate jobs are and always consolidate to in hard times (much to the chagrin of Louisiana and Oklahoma). 

Nobody mention Pennsylvania which is of course the number two producer of Natural Gas.  Couldn't have eviscerated Appalachian coal without it.

As far as environmentally friendly competitors for fossil fuel, can anyone name the state that produces the most wind energy (by far)?  They actually burned 40% less coal last month than they did in the same month in 2014. 

[King of Kensington]

In Canada (where unionization is higher), outside the oil and gas sector, resource extraction areas (logging and mining) are usually quite left-leaning.

I guess you see this in places like Butte Montana, northeastern Minnesota etc.

[RBH]

The UMWA didn't endorse either candidate in 12, IIRC. Hillary noting coal communities in a recent seems sorta interesting since KY/WV aren't voting early, but OH/VA are voting in March. I'd suspect she's not gonna win certain parts of coal country but it'll swing Dem in 16 unless they can stick her to Obama hard in those areas.

Then again, the UMW is the home union of longtime Republican John L. Lewis, and I'd think they're not as uniformly Democratic as some other trade unions have always been Democratic post-Wagner act.

I'd think Oil is gonna stay hardcore R since the drop in Oil prices probably hinders their willingness to change patterns. They might blame the administration for part of the drop, or for not doing more.

[jimrtex]

In Canada (where unionization is higher), outside the oil and gas sector, resource extraction areas (logging and mining) are usually quite left-leaning.

I guess you see this in places like Butte Montana, northeastern Minnesota etc.

Sure - but there is very little mining in Butte.

In 1900, Silver Bow had 20% of the state population. In 2010 it had 3.5%.

[Craziaskowboi]

It should be noted that many of the energy states mentioned have very small populations, Wyoming, North Dakota, West Virginia, Alaska.  Oklahoma and Louisiana are somewhat larger though they've both lost congressional districts over the last decades.  The smallness of states does effect coal as they're very dependent on populated states to use a product that tends to be very unpopular outside of coal mining regions and has competitive alternatives.  Hence Montana sending a delegation to Washington state begging them not to shutdown their portion of the Coalstrip power plant.

Texas of course is the exception. It's the biggest producer of oil and gas (by far).   It's also where the corporate jobs are and always consolidate to in hard times (much to the chagrin of Louisiana and Oklahoma). 

Nobody mention Pennsylvania which is of course the number two producer of Natural Gas.  Couldn't have eviscerated Appalachian coal without it.

As far as environmentally friendly competitors for fossil fuel, can anyone name the state that produces the most wind energy (by far)?  They actually burned 40% less coal last month than they did in the same month in 2014. 

With all the coal and natural gas in western Pennsylvania, it's no wonder there's been such a dramatic shift toward the Republicans there. If you overlay a map of Pennsylvania's coal and gas fields onto a map of the Commonwealth's recent political trends at the county level, there's almost a perfect correlation between the presence of hydrocarbons underground and a shift toward the Republicans.

Not that it was ever very credible in the first place, but James Carville's assessment of Pennsylvania politics is finally about to be discarded in favor of a new paradigm, illustrating an increasingly Democrat eastern half, and an increasingly Republican western half, with Allegheny County becoming an increasingly East Coast-style Democrat exclave (I have less than 20 posts so I can't post the necessary links to illustrate this trend), and Erie County remaining part of the Great Lakes Democrat belt.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Resource development is the Industry term.

Very republican.

The equation is simple. Invest 2 billion in a resource development project to try and get an IRR of 25%. So you make $500M profit.

But the area of the development is the real winner with over 4 times that amount invested.

Given gold, nickel and diamond mines are so high grade and  small, this style of mining, particularly underground has a very small environmental footprint.

Large iron ore and coal mines have a larger footprint.

[Indy Texas]

I read in another topic that "corn is more Democrat than wheat, and wheat is more Democrat than cattle." What I'm curious to know is, where would mining and resource extraction fall on this spectrum? I'm thinking it'd be over to the right with the cattle, because most hard-core environmentalists tend to be Democrats, and people who work in mining and resource extraction see the Democrat environmental platform as a threat to their livelihood. Correct me if I'm wrong, though.

I've heard, "Cotton is Democratic and wheat is Republican," and that was certainly the case in Texas up until the late 20th century.

Doesn't copper and silver mining in the Western US tend to correlate with Democratic political leanings in places like Montana?

[jimrtex]

I read in another topic that "corn is more Democrat than wheat, and wheat is more Democrat than cattle." What I'm curious to know is, where would mining and resource extraction fall on this spectrum? I'm thinking it'd be over to the right with the cattle, because most hard-core environmentalists tend to be Democrats, and people who work in mining and resource extraction see the Democrat environmental platform as a threat to their livelihood. Correct me if I'm wrong, though.

I've heard, "Cotton is Democratic and wheat is Republican," and that was certainly the case in Texas up until the late 20th century.

Doesn't copper and silver mining in the Western US tend to correlate with Democratic political leanings in places like Montana?

Sure. Butte is very Democratic-leaning. But mining is very limited. The main pit at Anaconda has been closed for some time.

And open-pit mining is very industrialized. "Miners" drive trucks or operate loaders. They are not that dissimilar from highway construction workers. Because the equipment is so expensive, companies can afford to pay workers well. The largest mine in the US (in Utah) has under 2000 workers, and is just outside Salt Lake. It is a relatively small part of employment.