Felicity Barringer’s April 8 New York Times article “In Areas Fueled by Coal, Climate Bill Sends Chill” asserts:

Even residents who endorse wind and solar energy have grown accustomed to the benefits of state policies that favor coal by putting a premium on low-cost electricity. So the idea of federal climate legislation that could increase electricity bills by putting a price on emissions of heat-trapping gases like carbon dioxide is unsettling.
…
Here in Missouri, economic incentives built into the state’s laws, history and habits encourage burning as much coal as possible.

But a thorough reading of the entire article fails to identify a single example given of any Missouri “laws” or “policies” that “favor” or “encourage” producing electricity from coal. Barringer does link to the Energy Information Administration state profile of Missouri when they write “economic incentives built into the state’s laws, history and habits”, but the EIA website doesn’t identify any pro-coal policies either.

If the NYT is going to report that the coal industry is receiving special help form the state or federal government, they owe it to their readers to at least identify one specific policy they are talking about.