More than that, Senate staffers believe their research shows the EPA has launched a war on coal that is far broader than restricting mountaintop mining. The EPA's response to the 404 permitting process also is prohibiting the development of smaller surface mines, deep mines and related coal operations, staff members said.

Committee staff members, who work for Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Okla., said their research shows the EPA has issued 45 of the 235 Clean Water Act Section 404 coal mining permits that it froze last year. The staff found the EPA is threatening 2.2 billion tons of coal production during the life of the proposed mines and posing financial threats to 81 small Appalachian businesses that serve the industry.

Only 19 of those permit applications -- 10 percent -- involve mountaintop mining projects, according to staff members.

"These impacts hit especially hard in West Virginia and Kentucky, where the majority of the delayed mining operations are located," the Senate staff said. "EPA's obstruction will also impact other Appalachian states, including Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Tennessee and Alabama."

Staff members said the Obama administration and the EPA are on a double track in attacking coal. It is using the EPA to disrupt the mining of coal by delaying the permitting process, and it is threatening utilities and other companies that burn coal by declaring carbon dioxide a pollutant it should regulate.

U.S. Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and Congressmen Nick Rahall and Alan Mollohan, both D-W.Va., have introduced legislation that would block the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases for two years. Rockefeller said the two-year delay would give Congress "the time it needs to address an issue as complicated and expansive as our energy future."

In the meantime, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, has taken a more aggressive position. She wants to strip the EPA of its authority to regulate greenhouse gases. That was a power the agency received in 2007 through a U.S. Supreme Court decision.

Murkowski's position makes more sense to me. I'm not sure what good would come from giving Congress two years to wrestle with climate legislation. Would that inspire anyone to invest in coal while the Obama administration continues to attack America's most abundant and affordable energy source?

* * *

The Wall Street Journal's Kimberly Strassel published a column March 5 that suggested the National Association of Insurance Commissioners had fallen prey to environmental groups that seek to regulate businesses. West Virginia Insurance Commissioner Jane Cline is president of the national organization.

In a column entitled "Carbon Caps Through the Backdoor," Strassel said environmental activist members of NAIC are trying to use the association to force businesses to adopt green practices. After all, all companies must buy insurance -- a product that states regulate.

Strassel went on to say NAIC, under pressure from environmentalists, developed a survey that states were to use to gauge how insurers were addressing climate-related issues. Strassel suggested the survey was designed "to coerce insurers to adopt and require climate policies, or risk financial and legal fallout."

But Cline and Eric Nordman, director of regulatory services for NAIC, said Strassel was not entirely accurate in her depiction of the survey or its purposes. Cline said NAIC developed the survey with public input that included a multitude of industry groups.

She conceded that not all of the groups were comfortable with the survey, but NAIC provided an open process.

In a March 8 letter to the editor of the Wall Street Journal, insurance commissioners from Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and Franklin W. Nutter of the Reinsurance Association of America said Strassel missed the mark. They maintained that insurers want and need information that helps them assess risk, and the NAIC study was designed to provide important facts.

* * *

Cline also responded to questions about a potential financial hit on one of the programs she oversees.

In January, The State Journal reported the health care reform bill the U.S. Senate passed late last year could greatly expand the number of families eligible to receive benefits from black lung claims. The Affordable Health Care Choices Act includes amendments from Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., that would eliminate some of the barriers coal miners reportedly face when they try to prove they have black lung.

That proposed change poses substantial costs to self-insured coal companies and private insurers. For example, BrickStreet Insurance, which provides black lung coverage to mining companies, could see unexpected claims of $80 million to $160 million against its reserves if the legislation goes into effect, company officials have said.

The state of West Virginia could be on the hook, too.

The West Virginia Insurance Commission oversees the state's old black lung fund, and Cline said Byrd's amendments, if they become law, could result in an impact of $50 million to $100 million on the $176 million fund, which no longer receives revenues.

Cline said her staff has been in contact with Byrd's office about the situation.

What a mess: How can businesses or state agencies manage their insurance programs effectively when the federal government changes the rules long after those insurance programs are established?

Congress' attempts to recast the nation's health care system has far too many outrageous surprises. This is just one more.

Dan Page is editor and publisher of The State Journal. His e-mail address is dpage@statejournal.com.