After reading the open letter regarding the permit process for the PolyMet mine ("In light of revelations, halt the permit process," July 1), I felt the need to respond to ensure that workers' voices aren't forgotten in this debate.
My union, the United Steelworkers, has represented generations of miners and thousands of other workers throughout Minnesota. We also have, for decades, worked closely with employers and community and environmental organizations to ensure that our workplaces do not blindly exploit our natural resources. We supported the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, and co-founded the BlueGreen Alliance with the Sierra Club.
That's why I felt strongly the need to respond in this case. While we agree that the permit process must be transparent and reliable, we also must not forget the important role mining plays and will continue to play in Minnesota's economy and in the green economy of our future.
Thousands of workers in Minnesota depend on mining jobs like those at PolyMet to support their families and communities. Mining pumps nearly $2 billion a year into Minnesota's economy and provides $60 million annually to the state's public schools.
Materials from Minnesota's mines are also essential to building a greener economy. Hybrid cars, rechargeable batteries and solar panels are made with materials from these mines.
As this process moves forward, I hope that Minnesotans do not fall into the trap of believing that we must choose between good jobs and a clean environment. We must fight for both, or we will have neither.
Leo W. Gerard, Pittsburgh, Penn.
The writer is the international president of the United Steelworkers.
ENVIRONMENT
Climate change deniers in power commit a crime against humanity
President Donald Trump, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Andrew Wheeler and other officials with authority to determine energy policy have (1) weakened the Clean Air Act by loosening rules regulating coal burning power plants, (2) attempted to roll back fuel efficiency standards for autos, (3) suppressed Department of Agriculture research on how climate change will affect crops, and (4) severely limited the regulatory and research role of the EPA.