Mike Sauers

In a recent edition of Broad + Liberty, Carl Marrara, Vice President of Government Affairs at the Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association opines a very narrow but breathtakingly informative view of “corporate welfare” and “fracking” as it relates to Texas-based Nacero’s proposed methane gas to gasoline plant to be located in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania. As a gratuitious reference he cites the frenzy over the Amazon “HQ2” that occured in 2018. He is quite clear when he points out the totally submissive disposition that cities, states and industrial development orgainzations must assume in order to attract development. He states that, “238 cities placed bids stuffed with cash, new public transportation proposals and publicly-funded infrastructure,” in order to lure Amazon. This was as idiotic as it was pathetic. Amazon makes billions in profits and is reported to pay little if any taxes. While Marrara does not call the above “largesse” corporate welfare, I do. Amazon is wildly profitable and they do not need taxpayer money. It is worth noting that the “Captains of Industry/Development” are always eager to blubber on about the benefits of capitalism yet they are just as eager to pull up to the trough of taxpayer money. It seems less than proficient and dignified to have states, cities and regions prostrate themselves in order to succeed. Under this scenario some workers win and some workers lose. It all depends on how much their elected representatives are willing to give up in taxpayer treasures. Representatives are heavily lobbied to dole out corporate welfare. Businesses should voluntarily change this approach. Taxpayers will not continue to support this.

Mr. Mararra attempts to use the above to draw a parallel to the Nacero proposal. He flames on, no pun intended, about the benefits of using natural gas (methane) as the feed stock. The natural gas industry desperately needs plants like Nacero. Fossil fuels are on their way out. The sooner the better. He totally ignores the substantial problems associated with hydraulic fracturing. There is no mention of the special treatment that the “fracking” industry received/receives from local, state and federal laws and regulations, no mention of the nonexistent “severence” tax, no mention of the enormous quantities of pure, fresh water needed to “frack”, no mention of the “secret” ingredients added to the water prior to fracking, no mention of the two types of polluted waste water that result from fracking, no mention of the radioactive elements present in waste water, no mention of the dubious methods for dealing with waste water such as deep wells, spreading it on roads as dust control/winter treatment and returning it to surface waters, no mention of how methane is a huge contributor to global warming and how fracking wells leak, no mention of pipelines, eminent domain, truck traffic, health problems and community disruption. I could go on but I think I have made my point.

Citizens have challenged “hydraulic fracturing”. Science has always been the basis of the challenges. Litigation has been a useful and necessary tool. Their have been some successes and some failures but the challenges continue. Mr. Mararra labels opponents of fracking who exercise their free speech rights as environmental extremists. This is unfortunate. He is bullying and setting a very bad example for our children. What we need is a full throated, scientific, public debate not name calling. Name calling is one of the first tactics used by people whose ideas cannot stand up to scrutiny in the public arena. I look forward to public hearings on the Nacero issue. I encourage the use of litigation when it is warranted.

Now, let’s get to the corporate welfare issue. As they say, it is hard to shine manure. Corporate welfare is a monster that is eating us alive. Corporate welfare to the fossil fuel industry in Pennsylvania is well documented. One might wonder why as the fossil fuel industry is wildly profitable. Nacero is a for profit company and as such they must be able to finance their project without dipping into corporate welfare. According to Mr. Mararra that is how Act 66 works. They have the money to get up and running. Great! Why should the taxpayer subsidize their profits? They either succeed or fail on their merits. Period! 25 year tax breaks and other unnamed benefits are not necessary. That is how capitalism works! Are these guys capitalists or something else? You be the judge. Research this. Make it an issue.