“Murray, an ally of President Donald Trump, filed a claim with the Department of Labor seeking to access federal benefits to treat his disease, which is caused by prolonged exposure to coal dust, Ohio Valley ReSource – a National Public Radio affiliate, reported on Thursday.”
IF the author’s one-trick pony agenda in writing this article, as close to the 2020 election as it is, isn’t clear, read the list of her articles hosted by IJ:
Now, back to the article itself;
The opening paragraph is very telling of the purpose of writing the article, and IJ’s purpose in hosting it:
“U.S. coal baron Robert Murray, whose company Murray Energy filed for bankruptcy last year, has applied for federal benefits to treat his black lung disease after opposing more stringent coal dust regulations for years, according to report by West Virginia public radio.”
First, there has been NO cause & effect relationship established between the recent regulatory rollback on coal regulations and the illness incurred by Robert Murray. None. Zip. Nada. Zilch. Murray, like many other victims of pneumoconiosis (‘BL’), incurred the disease over prolonged exposure to coal dust. The article properly includes his 63 years experience in coal mining, although much less than that 63 years were spent in coal mines.
Recent regulation rollbacks by the Trump Administration occurred long after Murray’s exposure.
Second, there is no legitimate purpose for reporting the relationship between Trump being an ally of Murray in regard to the subject of the article; i.e. filing for federal benefits for BL. The ultimate purpose, in my opinion, is political. Thus, IJ should have requested that the author properly edit her article, or reject it, to follow their TOS standards about politicization of an insurance issue. As the IJ has not done so, they are subject to criticism for not following their own rules; i.e. do as I say, not as I do. If this article was posted without thorough review, there is time for IJ to respond appropriately to this point.
Third, there is a critical point in this paragraph that may elude some…
” Murray’s company was one of several coal companies that provided collateral to self-insure their obligations to employees diagnosed with black lung disease. In 2015, the Department of Labor had recommended revoking its authority to self-insure due to its deteriorating finances though it did not follow through. ”
In not ‘following through’, per the last sentence – which is missing a comma (,) after ‘finances’, I believe the US DOL is estopped from denying federal BL benefits to Murray under the legal principle of W&E.
Fourth and finally, the fact that the source reports include Public Radio of WV and OH, but this is included: ” …Reuters could not independently confirm the report. …” means the sources have not confirmed the report, likely due to HIPPA rules violations that occurred in leaking the information in the last weeks of an election cycle. IJ should consider its integrity in regard to publishing stories that have not been confirmed by a legitimate news source (Reuters).
“Murray, an ally of President Donald Trump, filed a claim with the Department of Labor seeking to access federal benefits to treat his disease, which is caused by prolonged exposure to coal dust, Ohio Valley ReSource – a National Public Radio affiliate, reported on Thursday.”
IF the author’s one-trick pony agenda in writing this article, as close to the 2020 election as it is, isn’t clear, read the list of her articles hosted by IJ:
https://www.insurancejournal.com/author/valerie-volcovici/
I’ll provide a sample of words in the titles from the list above:
…Climate Change…
…Environmentalists sue…
…Oil firms…
…Consumers…
…Trump…
Now, back to the article itself;
The opening paragraph is very telling of the purpose of writing the article, and IJ’s purpose in hosting it:
“U.S. coal baron Robert Murray, whose company Murray Energy filed for bankruptcy last year, has applied for federal benefits to treat his black lung disease after opposing more stringent coal dust regulations for years, according to report by West Virginia public radio.”
First, there has been NO cause & effect relationship established between the recent regulatory rollback on coal regulations and the illness incurred by Robert Murray. None. Zip. Nada. Zilch. Murray, like many other victims of pneumoconiosis (‘BL’), incurred the disease over prolonged exposure to coal dust. The article properly includes his 63 years experience in coal mining, although much less than that 63 years were spent in coal mines.
Recent regulation rollbacks by the Trump Administration occurred long after Murray’s exposure.
Second, there is no legitimate purpose for reporting the relationship between Trump being an ally of Murray in regard to the subject of the article; i.e. filing for federal benefits for BL. The ultimate purpose, in my opinion, is political. Thus, IJ should have requested that the author properly edit her article, or reject it, to follow their TOS standards about politicization of an insurance issue. As the IJ has not done so, they are subject to criticism for not following their own rules; i.e. do as I say, not as I do. If this article was posted without thorough review, there is time for IJ to respond appropriately to this point.
Third, there is a critical point in this paragraph that may elude some…
” Murray’s company was one of several coal companies that provided collateral to self-insure their obligations to employees diagnosed with black lung disease. In 2015, the Department of Labor had recommended revoking its authority to self-insure due to its deteriorating finances though it did not follow through. ”
In not ‘following through’, per the last sentence – which is missing a comma (,) after ‘finances’, I believe the US DOL is estopped from denying federal BL benefits to Murray under the legal principle of W&E.
Fourth and finally, the fact that the source reports include Public Radio of WV and OH, but this is included: ” …Reuters could not independently confirm the report. …” means the sources have not confirmed the report, likely due to HIPPA rules violations that occurred in leaking the information in the last weeks of an election cycle. IJ should consider its integrity in regard to publishing stories that have not been confirmed by a legitimate news source (Reuters).