DV Journal

In order to secure our future, Pennsylvanians need affordable and reliable sources of energy and heavy investment in our home-grown energy resources.

Pennsylvania’s economic future remains in significant crisis. Costs continue to increase, budget decisions at the state level are increasingly more difficult, and we are losing jobs and investment to surrounding states because of energy policy decisions of the prior and current gubernatorial administrations.

The reality of bad public policy was evident at the start of this month when many Pennsylvania families were hit with the news that their energy costs will be going up, despite the commonwealth having abundant energy resources right under our feet.

Unfortunately, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives is likely to consider legislation in the coming weeks that continues us down the wrong path. The Pennsylvania Reliable Energy Sustainability Standard (PRESS) legislation being sought by the Shapiro administration as part of the governor’s “Lightning Plan” will only add to the problem by incentivizing state investment in so-called alternative energy sources like wind and solar while disincentivizing clean burning and affordable natural gas and other staple energy products that have produced Pennsylvania jobs and can lead to a better Pennsylvania economy.

The timing of the legislative push behind the governor’s PRESS plan is particularly egregious. PJM Interconnection and independent analysts have sounded the alarm: reckless state and federal energy policies that discriminate against reliable home-grown Pennsylvania energy generation – especially coal and natural gas plants – are driving the skyrocketing electricity costs hitting every Pennsylvanian.

The passage of PRESS would double down on already-made bad decisions by prioritizing unreliable wind and solar projects over the reliable energy sources that currently power our communities and economy.

This legislation not only ignores the immediate financial pain of Pennsylvanians but also jeopardizes our future by putting in doubt the sustainability of our energy sector, energy jobs, and associated economic growth for energy and tech companies who want to invest in our Commonwealth and its people if we start making the right decisions.

I have always believed that when it comes to legislating, we need to make our decisions based upon the bill before us, not on the concepts on which they are based. And it is obvious that should the PRESS bill pass, it will send a clear signal that Pennsylvania is no longer focused on securing our economic future with investment in reliable sources of energy.

While we may be just a few short years away from flipping switches and not having the lights turn on, the keys to success in Pennsylvania’s energy future are quite simple.

The first thing we need to do is immediately get out of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI)—a tax that increases energy bills and has placed significant uncertainty in the energy market—and not replace it with anything. RGGI puts Pennsylvania at an economic competitive disadvantage, has stifled investment in Pennsylvania by those looking to use our abundant energy resources, and has been an impediment to family-sustaining job growth in the energy sector.

Next, we must shift our regulatory focus so that it is easier to get energy projects off the ground and start a business in Pennsylvania. States that are winning the game for energy jobs and related tech and other private sector investment actively help get these projects off the ground while Pennsylvania continues to pick winners and losers in a bureaucratic nightmare process. If Pennsylvania wants the investment and the jobs, then Pennsylvania’s government needs to get out of the way.

More long term, Pennsylvania should prioritize investment in career and technical education so that Pennsylvania’s students are ready for the jobs that will be open to them when it comes time for the significant investment we can bring by incentivizing the growth of our energy sector.

Unfortunately, the PRESS legislation will set us further back from achieving these goals while investing in more costly and less reliable forms of energy.

(From a press release)

United States Attorney Jacqueline C. Romero announced that Scott Mason, 66, of Gladwyne, was charged by criminal information with wire fraud, securities fraud, investment adviser fraud, and filing false tax returns, arising from two fraudulent schemes that Mason, through his investment advisory firm Rubicon Wealth Management LLC, orchestrated to divert millions of dollars in client funds in order to finance his lavish lifestyle.

The information alleges that between 2016 and 2024, Mason — who had a fiduciary duty to make investment decisions in his clients’ best interests — transferred more than $17 million from 13 Rubicon clients to an entity that he owned and controlled, and ultimately used that money to finance his personal expenditures, including international travel, country club membership dues, credit card bill payments, and the purchase of an ownership stake in a Jersey Shore-based miniature golf course.

The information further alleges that Mason targeted clients with whom he had a longstanding relationship and who trusted him implicitly, including longtime friends and family members, and he often liquidated those clients’ securities holdings in order to finance the fraudulent transfers. Mason allegedly either forged client signatures on distribution authorization forms or omitted all pertinent details of the so-called “investments” when seeking client authorization for the transfers and instead falsely represented that he was investing client funds in diversified short-term bonds.

In reality, as the information alleges, Mason was converting client funds to his own personal use. He also used a portion of the fraud proceeds to repay another Rubicon client from whom Mason had allegedly misappropriated an additional several million dollars dating back to at least 2014, in order to avoid detection by that victim.

Finally, the information alleges that Mason failed to report any of his fraud proceeds on his personal income tax returns, generating a tax loss of approximately $3.225 million.

If convicted, the defendant faces a maximum possible sentence of 80 years’ imprisonment and a fine of $6,760,000.

The case was investigated by the FBI and IRS Criminal Investigation and is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Jessica Rice. In a parallel matter, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced charges against Mason Friday, as well.

An indictment, information, or criminal complaint is an accusation. A defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

A sharply divided political debate has emerged in Pennsylvania about whether increased funding leads to better outcomes in student performance.

It has ensnared the nation’s top academicians who, like Democrats and Republicans, tend to fall into the divergent camps: Money matters or no it does not.

But one school advocate told DVJournal those schools of thought ignore the middle ground: Yes, decades of research shows increased school funding leads to better outcomes for students. But  money must also be smartly invested by districts, especially in early childhood education with compelling evidence showing “very clear payoffs.”

“I don’t think it’s quite as simple as all Republicans are against funding our schools and all Democrats want to fund our schools,” said Laura Boyce, executive director of Teach Plus Pennsylvania.

She pointed to Sen. Pat Browne as an example. The Republican, tapped as Gov. Josh Shapiro’s secretary of revenue, chaired the commission that created a new funding formula for Pennsylvania schools.

“School funding is an extremely complex topic. Any type of … assessment of either money is going to solve all of our problems or there’s no amount of money you can throw at the problem therefore we shouldn’t do anything to reform our school funding system or to try to ensure both of those are way too simplistic,” Boyce said.

But that was exactly the argument the state’s Independent Fiscal Office made when it in wrote in a report that “the data suggests there is little or no correlation” between the funding and student outcomes.

Democrats immediately pounced on the suggestion, saying it mirrored arguments made by Republicans in a trial over the way the state pays for public schools, Spotlight Pa reported.

The case, filed by a handful of districts and advocates in 2014, centers on the state’s “heavy reliance on local property taxes” to fund public school districts, which creates imbalances between poorer and wealthier districts, Spotlight PA reported.

Organizations that support the lawsuit said the state has underfunded schools by $4.6 billion with a growing funding gap of about $4,800 between poor and wealthy districts.

The Pennsylvania School Boards Association said 38 percent of public education costs are covered by the state with local districts making up the difference through property taxes. That ranks Pennsylvania among the bottom five in the nation for its share of K-12 education funding.

Democrats feel the gaps discriminate against certain students and violate the state constitution while Republicans have suggested throwing more funding at struggling schools won’t improve outcomes.

Arguments in the case wrapped up months ago and a decision, now in the hands of Commonwealth Court Judge Renée Cohn Jubelirer, is likely to be appealed either way, WHYY reported.

Lawmakers split across the aisle have pointed to research on both sides of the debate.

A report from Rutgers professor Bruce Baker concluded that “aggregate measures of per-pupil spending are positively associated with improved or higher student outcomes.”

On the other hand, the Commonwealth Foundation found 78 percent of 8th graders were not proficient in math and 47 percent weren’t proficient in language arts despite increased funding.

It also cited a 2014 study from libertarian think tank, the Cato Institute, that also claimed there was “essentially no link” between the two.

Baker says both Democrats and Republicans are guilty of playing both sides of the fence in the debate. He pointed to comments that former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo made during his 2011 State of the State address when he declared the Empire State “spend[s] too much, but we get too little in return. We spend more money on education than any state in the nation, and we are number 34 in terms of results.”

Stanford economist Eric Hanushek is often trotted out as a foil to Baker, who called his counterpart “education’s merchant of doubt.” Hanushek has long argued that increased spending doesn’t necessarily translate into better outcomes for children.

Critics suggest his observations rely on “decades-old studies with crude methodologies,” according to Vox.

Yet both experts concede the other side isn’t totally wrong.

Hanushek said during Pennsylvania’s public education funding trial that “money can matter. It probably, at times, matters. The problem is that we don’t know when it’s going to matter,” Vox reported.

And Baker believes “other factors may moderate the influence of funding on student outcomes,” while adding that money must be “spent wisely to yield benefits.”

Boyce, the teaching advocate, believes now is not the time to skimp on public education funding despite a downward trend in student enrollment.

“We see overwhelming evidence of learning loss post-pandemic,” she said. “I think it’s a little bit too simplistic to say. ‘Oh, well, schools don’t need the money anymore.’ You have to take a more complex view beyond just, ‘What are the enrollment numbers?’”

Please follow DVJournal on social media: Twitter@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

Pennsylvanians are feeling the pinch of record-high inflation and energy costs. The global mismatch between energy demand and available supply has put upward pressure on prices, which isn’t helped by the current policy and regulatory environment.

What’s needed now to help boost supply, as well as bolster our economy and U.S. energy leadership, are policies that encourage investment in energy exploration and infrastructure build-out. And in Pennsylvania, with its abundance of shale gas, policymakers should embrace energy as part of the state’s economic competitiveness and create a climate that attracts additional investment.

Natural gas development in Pennsylvania has proven to be an economic boon for the state, bringing in billions of revenues annually, generating over $2.2 billion in impact fee funding during the last decade, supporting tens of thousands of jobs and signaling to other companies, both large and small, that they should invest here.

Natural gas and oil activity has not only contributed directly to Pennsylvania’s economy but has also boosted manufacturing, logistics, banking, construction, and many other sectors in the state – more than $78.3 billion in total economic impact.

Research has shown that every direct job in the natural gas and oil industry – over 102,000 – generated an additional 3.7 jobs in Pennsylvania. Good jobs mean family-sustaining wages that are spent on homes and at restaurants, retail stores, and small businesses.

Pennsylvania has prospered in many ways from a strong energy sector. But more can – and should – be done to ensure the commonwealth is one of the best places to do business and continues to grow its energy economy.

This year, state lawmakers advanced measures to bring more investments and jobs to Pennsylvania, while continuing to hold the line on policy proposals that could harm our state’s national standing as a top energy producer.

Pennsylvania is clearly making progress. Yet, to embrace all that Pennsylvania has to offer, we need predictable regulations and efficient permitting, as well as a business climate that keeps the Keystone State competitive.

In June, the American Petroleum Institute (API) unveiled a 10-point policy plan that would strengthen U.S. energy leadership and unleash investment in America. These policy solutions, like removing obstructions to permits for natural gas projects, accelerating liquid natural gas (LNG) exports, approving applications for new export terminals, and designating critical energy infrastructure projects, would create new energy access while avoiding harmful government policies and duplicative regulations.

These solutions offer energy producers ways to supply more American-made natural gas and oil to consumers here at home and our allies abroad–not to mention generate good jobs, increased tax revenues, and economic development.

Rather than rely on foreign regimes for natural gas and oil, we should encourage domestic production in Pennsylvania. And that starts with policymakers at every level of government supporting a statutory and regulatory framework that fosters economic development, allows Pennsylvania businesses to grow and multiply, and supports domestic energy production and infrastructure expansion.

Pennsylvania has led the way in energy production and environmental progress and has the potential to do much more.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, while natural gas production growth in the Appalachia region over the past decade has been helped by improved productivity from wells drilled, regional transportation capacity is nearly full.

Without additional pipeline capacity, access to affordable, reliable energy is limited, and so is the state’s ability to grow its energy economy. Advancing natural gas development and pipeline infrastructure could help meet the dual challenge of powering Pennsylvania homes and businesses while lowering greenhouse gas emissions. Under API’s solutions-focused policy plan, projects that support the production, processing, and delivery of energy should undergo a streamlined review and permitting process not to exceed one year.

At this critical time, with high inflation and energy prices hitting families hard, simply put, we need more energy. Ramping up energy production and completing pipeline projects doesn’t happen overnight. That is why we need smartly crafted policies that encourage investment and growth in the energy sector enacted today.

Pennsylvania-made natural gas is key to keeping our state competitive and boosting its bottom line. Consumers benefit, too, with increased access to affordable, reliable energy, and billions in new revenues that are directed to the state and communities in every corner of the commonwealth.

With the right approach, Pennsylvania can continue to build on these gains, safeguard our energy future and stimulate long-term economic growth.

Please follow DVJournal on social media: Twitter@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal