Pennsylvania
Power plants may win as PA eyes $2.6B tax credit rewrite
HARRISBURG — Companies have yet to claim a single dollar from a $2.6 billion tax credit package Pennsylvania enacted in 2022 to encourage natural gas use, hydrogen production, milk processing, and more.
Now, the Shapiro administration is floating a union-backed rewrite that would subsidize energy production and lower the bar to claim the credits. However, the legislature appears unlikely to take up such proposals before the end of the year.
The package includes four credits that would give tax breaks to companies if they reach certain investment and job creation benchmarks. One encourages the use of Pennsylvania milk to make dairy products, another incentivizes the production of hydrogen within the commonwealth, and a third promotes the making of semiconductors or conducting biomedical research.
The largest aims to reward companies for using Pennsylvania natural gas for manufacturing. First passed in 2020 and expanded in 2022, the credit authorizes up to $1.4 billion in tax breaks over 25 years to companies that use methane — a primary component of natural gas — to produce fertilizer or fuel. Texas-based Nacero announced such a facility for Luzerne County in 2021, but the company has repeatedly delayed the start of construction.
Without any takers for the credits, the Shapiro administration has circulated draft legislation that would convert the natural gas subsidy into one encouraging electricity production, according to a version of the bill viewed by Spotlight PA.
The new credit offers a power plant up to $100 million annually for three years. Facilities get less money if their prices exceed the average cost of energy as determined by PJM, the regional grid operator that serves Pennsylvania.
The proposed language does not restrict what type of fuel a power plant could use while claiming the credit. However, it says the energy produced should meet specific clean energy standards. These would likely include nuclear energy; renewables such as hydroelectric, solar, and wind; or, for fossil fuel-powered plants, the use of carbon capture to reduce emissions.
Rob Bair, president of the Pennsylvania State Building & Construction Trades Council, supports the concept.
The council represents tens of thousands of unionized electricians, carpenters, painters, and other construction workers who benefit from new projects, and holds considerable political sway, especially in an election year. Its constituent unions annually give millions of dollars to candidates and political committees.
Bair told Spotlight PA that he has pushed lawmakers to rewrite the program to encourage the growth of Pennsylvania’s energy industry, including nuclear, small-scale coal, and low-carbon hydrogen production. Doing so, he argued, could offset the loss of electricity generation and jobs caused by the shutdown of coal and gas plants.
“Let’s take the [tax credit] and let’s utilize it in a way that we incentivize electrical energy production in a clean, safe, environmentally friendly way,” Bair told Spotlight PA.
Backers of the original tax credit package included Bair, who argued the program would help Pennsylvania land several projects it was wooing at that time, including the Nacero plant to turn fracked methane into fertilizer, and a dairy processing facility.
Two years on, none of the projected facilities have landed in the commonwealth. Some went to other states, while others never materialized.
In a news conference last year, Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro discussed lessons from a failed attempt to use the tax credits to attract dairy brand Fairlife. He named shorter permitting times and better financial incentives for companies as areas where he thinks the state could improve.
Shapiro underscored this goal in his 2024 budget address when he said he was “sick and tired of losing to friggin’ Ohio,” and argued Pennsylvania needs to cut red tape and develop shovel-ready sites for new projects.
Shapiro got both in the most recent state budget. The legislature gave the OK for Pennsylvania to borrow $500 million to provide grants or loans to encourage industrial development. It also approved a streamlined permitting process that allows companies to hire state-approved third-party reviewers in certain cases.
The draft bill circulated by the Shapiro admin would make it easier for companies in target industries to claim tax breaks by lowering the amount of money the businesses have to invest and the number of long-term jobs their projects must create.
Shapiro hasn’t said much publicly about his push to change the tax credits. During a news conference earlier this month, he said the “law is something that we … are considering how best to use for the benefit of Pennsylvania.”
A spokesperson for Shapiro told Spotlight PA the governor is “open to repurposing these tax credits to ensure they can be used effectively to create more jobs and opportunity.”
Other Democrats have largely stayed quiet on any brewing policy shifts, although some senior lawmakers have floated changes that acknowledge the credits must be rewritten to be useful.
State Rep. Rob Matzie (D., Beaver) proposed adding a subsidy that would support sustainable aviation fuel production, with a tax credit of up to $30 million each year. His ideas carry weight because he chairs the state House’s influential Consumer Protection, Technology, and Utilities Committee, through which major energy bills have passed in the past year.
Similarly, state Rep. Steve Samuelson (D., Northampton), who chairs the state House’s tax policy-focused Finance Committee, recently introduced a bill that would make the semiconductor manufacturing credit easier to claim.
State House Democratic spokesperson Elizabeth Rementer didn’t comment on whether chamber leaders would support a rewrite of the tax credits, but did say that the caucus is “constantly evaluating tax credit programs to ensure they’re being used properly and creating jobs.”
“If the … program is being underutilized it will be examined more closely,” she said.
Rewriting the program will likely be a harder sell in the GOP-controlled state Senate.
Majority Leader Joe Pittman (R., Indiana) said he hasn’t seen enough from Shapiro to be sold on the proposal.
“The administration spent a significant amount of time talking to outside interested parties on that issue … and spent no time talking to me or my team about what such a proposal would look like,” Pittman told Spotlight PA in August.
Pittman has personally been open to state programs to encourage energy production, repeatedly saying that he is interested in expanding small-scale nuclear reactors. He has also voiced concerns about the state’s long-term ability to produce enough energy for itself.
Other state Republicans are less inclined to hear Shapiro and the trades out.
State Sen. Kristin Phillips-Hill (R., York) voted against the original deal and said her skepticism of government handouts remains in place.
According to federal data, Pennsylvania is the second largest net supplier of energy to other states in the country. The excess energy goes to neighbors in Maryland and New York.
Those states, she’s argued, have allowed their fossil-fuel-powered plants to close while approving new data centers and other electricity-heavy industries powered by Pennsylvania.
As such, she argued that any subsidies offered by Pennsylvania would only subsidize other state’s “failed energy policies.”
“I just don’t see the benefit to Pennsylvanians,” said Phillips-Hill. “Am I going to support something that is going to continue to take Pennsylvania taxpayer dollars to subsidize the folly and irresponsibility of other states? Absolutely not.”
The Commonwealth Foundation, a conservative advocacy organization, recently put out an energy platform that echoes Phillips-Hill’s position, saying that it would not support any such tax credits or other state subsidies.
André Béliveau, the energy policy director at the Commonwealth Foundation, said that he understands the underlying impulse to bolster the industry and production. But he argues the legislature should do so by stripping back regulations and mandating that any changes to energy production maintain or improve grid reliability.
“We want to make sure we have reliable and affordable energy,” said Beliveau. “Subsidies are not the way to get there.”
BEFORE YOU GO… If you learned something from this article, pay it forward and contribute to Spotlight PA at spotlightpa.org/donate. Spotlight PA is funded by foundations and readers like you who are committed to accountability journalism that gets results.
Pennsylvania
Trump admin rule puts reproductive health care for 160K Pa. patients at risk, lawsuit says
Family planning and health organizations that serve tens of thousands of people across Pennsylvania could see federal funding delayed or denied by a new Trump administration policy, a new lawsuit alleges.
The suit, which includes the Cumberland County-based Family Health Council of Central Pennsylvania as a plaintiff, takes aim at a step added this year by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to applications for Title X grants, which provide local agencies with funds to aid low-income and uninsured patients with family planning and related health services.
That new process is detailed in the Title X 2027 Notice of Funding Opportunity published in April. It states that before applicants are assessed on their merits, a group of presidential appointees will conduct an “alignment review” to determine whether each application matches the agency’s “priorities.” The plan offers no opportunity to appeal the group’s decision.
To the plaintiffs in the suit, that sounded like code for evaluating applicants based on politics.
“The Trump administration’s attempt to condition Title X funding on political allegiance is a grave threat to public health,” Sara Rose, deputy legal director at ACLU of Pennsylvania and attorney on the case, said in a statement. “Grant decisions must be guided by objective standards to ensure that taxpayer money is spent fairly and efficiently without regard to the ideology of its recipients.”
Created during the Nixon administration to help low-income people prevent unwanted pregnancies, Title X funding has long drawn opposition from anti-abortion activists.
The Trump administration has also attempted to shift the focus of the program toward promoting more pregnancies. Officials tried and failed earlier this year to block Title X funding from reaching Planned Parenthood facilities.
The suit is filed in the federal Middle District of Pennsylvania. It names HHS, Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and other agency staff as defendants.
There are four Title X grantees in the commonwealth, each serving a specific region: The Family Health Council in central Pennsylvania, AccessMatters in Philadelphia, Adagio Health in the west, and Maternal and Family Health Services in the northeast.
Combined, they receive more than $12.6 million in Title X funds annually to serve more than 160,000 patients in Pennsylvania, according to their grant details listed on HHS’ website. (AccessMatters is by far the largest, working with more than 90,000 people.)
These organizations offer everything from fertility care and access to contraception to screenings for cancers and sexually transmitted infections.
Nationwide, the most recent data from HHS shows Title X grantees served nearly 2.8 million people.
Also at issue in the lawsuit is that HHS already has a set of regulations, put in place during President Joe Biden’s administration, that govern Title X applications — and many of them directly conflict with stated Trump administration priorities.
The suit highlights, for instance, that the HHS website currently states that ending “ideologically-laden concepts like health equity” is a priority, while Title X rules simultaneously require grantees to “advance health equity.”
Another alleged conflict stems from the Trump administration’s opposition to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, especially for transgender people. Current Title X regulations mandate that grantees ensure transgender people have access to their programming.
Brigitte Amiri, deputy director at the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project, told Spotlight PA that the Trump administration could overturn the Biden-era regulations by undertaking a public notice and comment rulemaking process.
“But you can’t just do it by a funding announcement,” she said.
The new review step “subverts the integrity” of the Title X grant application process, the lawsuit argues, and enables HHS “to hijack” the Title X program to fund organizations furthering the agency’s “political agenda.”
The lawsuit also notes that Title X funds are prohibited from being used for abortions.
Federal Judge Jennifer Wilson, who was nominated to the bench by Trump in 2019, will hear the case.
Spotlight PA sought a comment on the lawsuit from HHS, but did not receive a response.
The Family Health Council of Central Pennsylvania was selected to join the lawsuit because it has received Title X funding since the establishment of the program in 1970, and it serves a large area, the chief executive of the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association told Stateline.
Patricia Fonzi, president and CEO of the Family Health Council, said in a statement that her organization serves more than 31,000 people across a 24-county region.
“We welcome a competitive grant process and believe every applicant should be evaluated on its ability to effectively serve communities, responsibly steward federal resources, and demonstrate the experience and capacity necessary to carry out the Title X statute,” Fonzi said.
“At the end of the day, the success of Title X is measured by whether people can access the care they need in their own communities — and that depends on funding decisions grounded in experience, proven performance, and the ability to deliver comprehensive care where it is needed most.”
The plaintiffs are urging the court to vacate the Trump administration’s new Title X rule and declare it “unlawful.”
Title X funds are issued to agencies on a five-year basis, with annual renewal requirements. The new rule at issue was included in the process for grants under fiscal year 2027, which will begin a new five-year cycle.
___
This story was originally published by Spotlight PA and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
Pennsylvania
Federal government sues Pennsylvania, others over SNAP data
(WHTM) — Pennsylvania is one of four states facing a lawsuit from the federal government over SNAP applicant data.
The U.S. Department of Justice filed suit against Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Michigan, and Minnesota. They are seeking the last five years of SNAP applicant data in the respective states.
The DOJ alleges that the four states refused to turn over data to the U.S. Department of Agriculture “so that USDA could ensure that states are properly administering and enforcing their determinations of residents’ eligibility.”
“The American people deserve a government that is transparent about how it spends their hard-earned tax dollars,” said Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche. “These four states are thwarting USDA’s efforts to ensure that the billions of dollars in SNAP benefits they distribute every year are not lost to fraud.”
“Stopping the rampant theft of taxpayer money demands a whole-of-government response, including strong participation at the state level,” said Assistant Attorney General Colin M. McDonald of the Justice Department’s National Fraud Enforcement Division. “These states are happy to take hundreds of millions of federal tax dollars—much of which is exploited by fraudsters—but want zero transparency over how those tax dollars are spent.”
The Department of Justice said 28 states promptly provided data and such indicated “there are billions of dollars per year in SNAP funds going to overpayments and fraud.”
The USDA has been seeking data for the past year or so, leading to a legal battle over concerns about how the data would be used.
Pennsylvania
House Republicans stall activity, Pennsylvania Rep. Meuser calls tactics ‘foolish’ | Fox Business Video
Maria Bartiromo reports on House Speaker Mike Johnson sending representatives home early as Republican hardliners stall floor activities, refusing votes without action on the SAVE America Act.
House Speaker Mike Johnson sent representatives home early as hardline Republicans stalled floor activities, demanding action on the SAVE America Act. President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social, urging House Republicans to unify and avoid giving power to Democrats. Rep. Dan Meuser (R-PA) labels the stalling tactics ‘foolish,’ emphasizing the need for legislative progress and appropriations.
-
Oregon7 minutes agoPublic asked to help find missing 2-year-old Armani Andrews in Portland
-
Pennsylvania10 minutes agoTrump admin rule puts reproductive health care for 160K Pa. patients at risk, lawsuit says
-
Rhode Island15 minutes agoWhen will RI see promised Time-Varying Rates on electric bills? | Opinion
-
South-Carolina22 minutes agoMyrtle Beach is a hotspot for sharks and the potential to be bit
-
South Dakota24 minutes agoWork, housing and staffing: How South Dakota’s corrections chief aims to keep inmates from returning
-
Tennessee30 minutes ago
Tennessee GOP leaders denounce antisemitic Young Republicans mailers | The Jerusalem Post
-
Texas37 minutes agoA truck crash released 20 million bees. Local beekeepers rushed to save them.
-
Utah40 minutes ago‘2.5 minutes of terror’: Passengers sue Delta, alleging crew flew into dangerous weather despite warnings, injuring dozens