STATE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SURFACE MINING CONTROL AND RECLAMATION ACT OF 1977

The implementation of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) of 1977 in coal producing states is guided by a partial preemption policy approach t h a t establishes a balance between federal and state decision-making authority. The usefulness of this approach is assessed by analyzing state enforcement actions in relation the institutional capacity of states to shoulder regulatory responsibilities and the propensity of the federal Office of Surface Mining (OSM) t o oversee state enforcement actions and, if necessary, to undertake corrective action. Our results indicated that state administration of SMCRA was canstrained by the lack of effective federal oversight but was largely unaffected by interstate differences in political, economic, or administrative characteristics.     

THE NEED FOR FEDERAL OVERSIGHT OF ALTERNATIVE BOND SYSTEMS UNDER SMCRA

The 1977 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) requires mine operators to post reclamation bonds before mining begins. The Federal Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) has approved alternative bond systems in seven states. These systems, rather than requiring bond amounts at the full cost of reclamation, require operators t o submit only a flat rate, acreage specific bond. Additional reclamation costs should be covered by a supplemental fund composed generally of permit fees, taxes, or penalties.
In many cases, alternative bond systems fail to ensure that funds will be available to reclaim coal mined land in the event of operator default, as required by SMCRA. OSMRE needs to take a more active role in oversight of existing state alternative bond systems to ensure that reclamation occurs.     

THE STATES AND DEREGULATION: THE CASE OF SURFACE MINING

The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA), passed to correct the abuses of surface mining, assigned key implementation roles to the states. While the federal government originally enforced SMCRA, states could operate the program themselves. Once states decided to run their own program the federal government would oversee them to insure they properly enforce the Act. This research examines the enforcement behavior of states in the 1980s. The results indicate that early in the Reagan administration eastern states enforced the SMCRA less stringently than other states. Eastern states increased their level of enforcement later in the 1980s in response to pressures for increased federal oversight from Congress, interest groups and others.     

FEDERAL COURT INVOLVEMENT IN THE APPLICATION OF SURFACE MINING LAW

This article surveys 122 federal cases reported in the Surface Mining Law Summary from the earliest legislation under SMCRA to the end of 1987. The analysis distinguished between cases in which all OSMRE regulations or applications of SMCRA were upheld by the federal courts, and those in which one or more regulations/applications were overturned. The analysis further classifies the cases according to whether the decisions were favorable to industry (or, conversely, to environmental/citizen groups), according to whether the issues involved were primarily of narrow private right (or, conversely, of broad public policy), and according to state-of-origin. Finally, separate examination of those cases in which OSMRE's discretion in the enforcement of SMCRA was restricted is provided. The author concludes t h a t both the federal courts and OSMRE have been reasonably even-handed in their application of SMCRA, contrary to the earlier expectations of some proponents and opponents of surface coal mining regulation in the United States.     

THE SURFACE MINING CONTROL AND RECLAMATION ACT OF 1977 IN OKLAHOMA: STATE AND FEDERAL COHABITATION

The enforcement of the SMCRA in Oklahoma has led to improvements and transformations in the coal industry, state and federal regulatory agencies and the public. The catalyst for these changes was the federal takeover of inspection and enforcement of the SMCRA in Oklahoma with the state carrying on all other mining regulatory activities from 1984 through 1987. This pattern of cohabitation differed from that in Tennessee where OSM took over all enforcement of the SMCRA or that in states that enter into cooperative agreements to provide state regulation of coal mining on federal lands within the state. Cohabitation in Oklahoma produced a new, more positive attitude toward cooperative federalism by both federal and state regulatory bodies that might serve as a model for other states with OSM maintaining state agency support for policy objectives while allowing the state reasonable decisional discretion.     

FEDERAL-STATE RELATIONS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SURFACE MINING POLICY

The federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 not only established national performance standards and permitting procedures for the coal industry, but also provided for stateprimacy. The principle of state primary is both simple and intuitively appealing: Because states do not have adequate resources to develop effective regulatory programs, the federal government would set up comprehensive procedures and criteria to guide the states in preparing their own plans. The obvious advantage of state primacy is that i t provides for flexibility in implementation.
Ultimately, state primacy is an experiment in cooperative federalism, a sharing of authority and responsibility between the states and the federal government to insure both the general welfare and sensitivity to local conditions. The history of surface mining regulation is instructive because i t points out the pitfalls and promise of cooperative federalism as well as the critical role of the courts in making state primacy work.     

Federal Administration of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 in Oklahoma

SMCRA, which established detailed standards for the surfacemining of coal, attempted to balance the need to increase coalproduction with safeguarding the environment. The act was basedon the principle of cooperative federalism. The states wereoffered both positive and negative inducements to assume importantroles in the design and implementation of regulatory programsconsistent with the SMCRA. Oklahomas Department of Mines (DOM)carried out the provisions of the act so poorly that the federalOffice of Surface Mining (OSM) was compelled to take over SMCRAinspection and enforcement. Other provisions of the act wereadministered by DOM, which found itself in a condition of "cohabitation"with OSM from 1984–1987. During that time, DOM becamea stronger, technologically sophisticated agency; OSM gaineda greater appreciation of the difficulties of implementing astate program; the mining industry became reconciled to reclamationcontemporaneous with mining; and there was an increase in citizenparticipation. The return of primacy to Oklahoma may usher ina new federal relationship in surface mining regulation, withmore power shifting to the states as budget pressures reducefunds and the number of employees in OSM.     

From Coercion to Partnership in Federal Partial Preemption: SMCRA, RCRA, and OSH Act

This article examines the experiences of three important partial-preemptionprograms—the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Actof 1977 (SMCRA), the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970(OSH Act), and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of1976 (RCRA)—over the last two decades to improve our understandingof how federal-state interactions have shaped the regulatorypartnership. The evidence we gather suggests that the controlof regulatory programs has shifted over time back and forthbetween the federal government and the states. In the initialyears of these programs, what the Congress intended to be aregulatory partnership was, in effect, almost total federalpreemption of state authority. Under the Ronald Reagan administration,the opposite occurred; federal regulation in many cases becamede facto state regulation as federal officials essentially abdicatedtheir oversight responsibility. By the end of the 1980s, thefederal government began again to assert greater control overintergovernmental regulatory programs. The regulatory relationshipthat emerged is one in which the federal government and thestates share responsibility and authority for the implementationof these programs.     

IMPLEMENTING A PROGRAM OF COOPERATIVE FEDERALISM IN SURFACE MINING POLICY

This article outlines the legislative history of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 and describes the forces that promoted a federalist arrangement of shared powers and responsibility for implementing the environmental reclamation provisions of the Act. The major components of the Act are reviewed and the Act is examined in terms of its general effectiveness in promoting reclamation as well as its contribution to the practice of American federalism and the capacity of state government to implement complex regulatory programs. The article concludes that SMCRA has had a positive impact in terms of improving state capabilities, expanding public involvement in decision making, and enhancing federal and state cooperation.     

SURFACE MINING CONTROL AND RECLAMATION ACT: A UTAH PERSPECTIVE

The authority to regulate the coal industry a t the state level, under state statute and rules, the importance of the coal industry to the state, the importance of an environmentally sound regulatory program, and the benefit of a state-managed abandoned mine reclamation program, in short the ability of the state to manage its own natural resources, make state primacy a necessity, not an option.
Implementation of SMCRA cannot be measured in the myriad of oversight statistics. Effectiveness means cost-effective, timely reclamation of abandoned sites; consistent, workable rules and regulatory practices; responsive program management; and compliance which is internalized in the mine's operations.     

THE CAREER SERVICE IN THE 1980s: WHAT ARE THE FACTS?

This paper seeks to provide statistics on how the career service has developed within Commonwealth Government administration over the past decade or so. On the basis of trends in these data some speculations are offered on how the career service might look in the 1980s. The views expressed are speculations, not forecasts. In Commonwealth administration, the career service concept has by and large been held to embrace staff employed in the Commonwealth Public Service (CPS) under the Public Service Act, particularly permanent staff. While it is possible to debate the extent of the career service, this paper will confine itself to full-time permanent, temporary and exempt staff of the CPS, employed under the Public Service Act. It thus excludes staff employed under other Acts, although the opportunities for movement of CPS staff to statutory authorities and back again should not be overlooked.     

SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS AND ENERGY DEVELOPMENTS

Social Impact Assessments (SIAs), prompted by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and by complementary legislation in certain states, are prepared, ostensibly, to provide expert scientific analyses of human societies; to project the probable consequences to those societies from largescale projects planned for their environments; to suggest ways to mitigate deleterious consequences; and to aid decision makers. The majority of SlAs prepared in relation to proposed energy developments have not been based on expert scientific analysis; omit crucial topics; are seldom based on primary analyses of the communities that will be affected; and often suggest ways to mitigate infrastructural problems (roads, houses and utilities) but l i t t l e else. Interests of the corporations that seek development permits are served by research houses commissioned to prepare SIAs, and by the agencies that approve the SlAs and subsequently grant permits to the corporations to commence with their energy-related projects-the interests of the community residents are not served. The responsibility of social scientists in preparing SlAs for communities that are scheduled for energy-related projects and state-of-the-art analyses of those communities are discussed.     

New Federalism Modified: Jobs and Highways in New York

The Job Training Partnership Act of 1982 (JTPA) and the SurfaceTransportation Assistance Act of 1983 (STAA) were intended inpart to stimulate the American economy out of recession. Eachlaw embodied a different approach to that goal and, hence, poseddifferent implementation challenges to the states. JTPA wasintended to decentralize decisionmakingand administration tothe states, and to in volve the private sector in state andlocal decisionmaking processes. Moreover,the level of federalaid was reduced below that available under its predecessor,the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA). STAA wasintended to inject increased federal funds for rebuilding roadsand highways. Its stipulation that states bring their standardsfor truck dimensions and routes into line with new nationalstandards was a centralizing feature of the legislation. Inexamining responses of the states in 1983 to these laws, particularlyNew York, decentralization appeared to be on track in the earlyimplementation of JTPA. The level of involvement of governorsand, to a lesser extent, legislatures was higher than underCETA. The implementation of STAA revealed both decentralizingand centralizing features at work. Participation of the NewYork legislature in deciding how the increased highway fundswere to be spent was much higher than before STAA, but conflictsbetween the national and state governments over the new nationalstandards were resolved in favor of the national government.     

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION: THE COMMONWEALTH EXPERIENCE*

Abstract: This paper outlines the background and rationale of the Commonwealth Freedom of Information (FOI) legislation and discusses the specific nature and operation of the FOI Act, including some current issues emanating from the interpretation of some of its provisions by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) and the courts. The overall cost/benefit balance of the Act is considered, with particular reference to the recent report of the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs on the operation and administration of the Act.     

Can disincentives bring accountability in governance? Experiences of Right to Public Services Guarantee Act in Madhya Pradesh State of India

Many Indian states have enacted Right to Public Services Guarantee Act that promises the delivery of public services to citizens in time‐bound fashion, failing to which, responsible government officials face financial penalty. Therefore, effective service delivery, an indicator of good and responsive governance, is being attempted to be achieved through a “system of disincentive.” The paper tries to analyze if the system of disincentive is effective in ensuring administrative accountability. The paper is based on primary and secondary data. The primary data were collected as part of an action research carried out in 2012, which was supplemented with secondary data collected for different studies during 2015 and 2016. The paper uses a governance accountability framework to analyze implementation of the Act. The study finds that although success rate of implementation of the Act is quite high, the Act presents a narrow idea of accountability. There are no accountability norms for higher officials and elected leaders who head the public service departments. The study also finds that necessary accountability structures have not been developed and there is a dearth of enabling environment that makes accountability structures effective. The study also finds that, despite the provisions for financial penalty, responsible officials find ways to escape. The study exposes weak points in the implementation of the Act, which can be strengthened to achieve desired outcomes. The study can be an important source for course corrections in the states/countries where right to public service delivery is in effect.     

THE POLITICS OF LEGISLATIVE OVERSIGHT: MONITORING EDUCATIONAL REFORM IN SIX STATES

Legislative oversight traditionally has been viewed as a rational tool for achieving democratic accountability. Legislators conduct oversight to ensure consistency between implementation and official policy directives. The major theme of this paper is t h a t oversight is best understood as an integral part of legislative-administrative politics. By examining how six states monitored recent educational reforms, the author finds that legislators conducted oversight in ways that minimized time commitments and maximized political benefits.
The paper concludes that legislative interest in controlling implementation often was secondary to political considerations. Oversight, therefore, may not really be effective as an accountability tool.     

THE AMERICAN STATES AND THE SHIFTING LOCUS OF POSITIVE ECONOMIC INTERVENTION

While there has been a turn away from positive government intervention in the economy at the national level, we have witnessed an embrace of this strategy in may of the American states. What impact, if any, have these efforts by state governments had on their economies? The paper focuses on variations in party control, competition, and ideology, the institutional capacities of governors and legislatures, and policy measures, while controlling for a variety of alternative influences on state economies. For the period from 1968–1979 states were dominated by the national economy and other forces over which they had little or no control, and thus had little or no effect on their economies. However, for the 1980–1985 period, party, political capacity, and policy exerted a statistically significant influence on state economic performance.     

THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAMS

Assimilating disadvantaged workers in labor markets has been the focus of national policy initiatives for at least two decades. In recent years, public policies have been formulated which will not only provide incentives for the private sector to employ the disadvantaged, but also afford the private sector a larger responsibility in formulating and implementing targeted employment programs. The Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) and Target Jobs Tax Credit (TJTC) are two major examples. This paper initially reviews the public and private employment and training efforts between 1962 and 1982. Considerable attention is given to summarizing and evaluating the performance of these efforts, especially in light of recent program initiatives by the Reagan Administration.     

WORKFARE IN THE 1980s: SUCCESSES AND LIMITS

Between 1981 and 1987 twenty-eight states experimented with workfare programs. By requiring mandatory community service from welfare recipients, the states hoped to reduce welfare caseloads as well as increase community service. Based in part on those program experiences, Congress included the first national workfare requirement in the 1988 welfare reform package (the Family Support Act). This study is the first to attempt to evaluate the implementation and impact of workfare on a national basis. A pooled, cross-section, longitudinal model is used to estimate the effect of workfare on AFDC caseloads. Despite the low level of state-level implementation, the evidence suggests that workfare may have contributed to welfare caseload reductions in the 1980s.     

Social Constructions of People with AIDS: Target Populations and United States Policy, 1981–1990

This paper examines the United States policy toward people with AIDS (PWAs) using a theory of the social construction of target populations (Schneider and Ingram, 1993). A policy narrative is developed which focuses on the ways PWAs have been categorized throughout the epidemic and how the characterization of these constructed target populations has influenced the design of policies aimed at these groups. The Ryan White Act of 1990 and the debate surrounding its passage is examined and found to be consistent with the expectations of the theory. Propositions which extend the framework are offered as a guide for future research.