Finding a Balance

Fines are one way we punish individuals or corporations when they break the law, and how much we levy for which offenses can tell us quite a bit about our priorities as a society. Just a couple of weeks ago, the FCC upheld the $550,000 fine levied against CBS for Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" (helped along by Justin Timberlake) on the 2004 Super Bowl. I'm sure you remember the national trauma and firestorm that caused. But an analysis in USA Today last month compared that to the ridiculously low fines levied against coal mining companies for safety violations. The analysis has a number of examples. We don't know what kind of fines might be levied against the Sago Coal Mine where a dozen miners were killed in an accident on January 2, but a 2001 accident in Alabama that killed 13 resulted in a fine of $435,000, which was later reduced to a mere $3,000. Now, it's certainly fair to point out that the Jackson-Timberlake incident at the Super Bowl didn't kill anybody, but it's only proper to point out that none of those miners bared a nipple on national TV, either.

At a Senate hearing this week, Democrats argued hard for higher fines. West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller correctly pointed out that when fines for safety violations are low and affordable, it's far more cost effective for the company to pay the fine than to correct the unsafe conditions. The House held similar hearings, but Charlie Norwood, the Republican chairman of the House subcommittee in charge of the hearings abruptly ended them before Democrats could ask a second round of questions of the representatives from the Mine Safety and Health Administration in attendance.

Unfortunately, I'm too tired out tonight to be outraged by all this. Insert your own pithy comment about young lives mattering less than fleeting peeks at nipples here.