Word: pact
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1970-1979
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...before cameras in the West Wing, he briskly announced that the long ordeal was probably over. A "voluntary settlement" had been reached between the 165,000 striking United Mine Workers and the 130-member Bituminous Coal Operators Association. Said the President to the workers who must now ratify the pact: "This agreement serves the national interest as well as your own. If it is not approved without delay, time will have run out for all of us." After dealing with B.C.O.A. negotiators through the afternoon, U.M.W. President Arnold Miller was walking down the street on his way to dinner when...
...That was when the 39-member U.M.W. bargaining council?with rowdy support from rank and file miners, who barged into U.M.W. headquarters?rejected President Miller's initial agreement with the B.C.O.A. The agreement called for a three-year wage increase, from $8.11 an hour to $10.46. But the pact also allowed mine owners to penalize workers who joined in a wildcat strike by requiring offenders to pay $20 a day to the U.M.W. health fund. The owners were adamant on the wildcat provision because 2.5 million man-days were lost that way in the coal mines last year, ten times...
...Senators were impressed. Indiana Democrat Birch Bayh, who heads the intelligence committee, pointed out that its report was based on "largely secondhand" evidence. Treaty proponents argued irrefutably that the drug-trafficking allegations were irrelevant to the question of whether the canal pact was desirable. Said California's Alan Cranston, the majority whip: "There was no smoking gun found in Torrijos' hand, and besides, he's not going to be around in the year 2000." Even Alabama Democrat James Allen, a leading opponent of the treaties, concluded that the drug debate had been pointless. Said he: "I don't think...
...stages: first Senate Majority Leader Robert Byrd and then Minority Leader Howard Baker were to endorse the treaties after well-publicized visits to Panama; then they were to bring the treaties to the Senate floor, where individual Senators would be allowed to appease critics at home by amending the pact with an "understanding" clarifying the U.S. right to intervene to protect the canal's neutrality after 2000. But as of last week the pro-treaty forces remained short of the 67 votes (two-thirds of the Senate) needed to pass the pact...
Cranston, the treaties' floor leader, could count only 60 sure votes and four more "leaning" in favor of the pact, with eight still undecided. Although Cranston hopes to pick up more votes in the weeks ahead, he cautions: "I wouldn't bet a large amount of money on the outcome...