Pennsylvania’s state Senate approved legislation Thursday that would block state aid from going to any university that boycotts or divests from Israel, following pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses across the country that included demands for divestment.

The measure, which passed by a vote of 41 to 7, also would bar the state treasurer and public pension systems from boycotting or divesting from Israel’s government or commercial financial activity in that country.

The bill won support from all but one Republican and most Democrats. It now goes to the House.

Supporters of the legislation said it was motivated by a desire to support an ally nation in its war with Hamas, to fight a rising tide of antisemitism in the United States and to alert state-subsidized universities that they must protect Jewish students from threats and bullying by anti-Israel protesters.

The bill was opposed by some of the Senate’s more liberal members, including Democrat Art Haywood, who said he was concerned that it would restrict free speech.

Fellow Democratic Sen. Steve Santarsiero, who was a sponsor, disputed that the bill infringes on freedom of speech and said students and faculty will still be able to protest peacefully.

The bill does not punish universities that make investment decisions to fulfill their fiduciary responsibility to maximize returns, and it has has no impact on personal college investment accounts or student loans, Santarsiero said.

Another supporter, Democratic Sen. Judy Schwank, said she hopes it sends a message to college administrators and boards of trustees that are responsible for campus safety.

“Bodily harm, death threats, go beyond just hurt feelings and they certainly stretch the limits of free speech,” Schwank said.

This story originally appeared on Spotlight PA.

As billions of federal dollars for clean energy projects become available to Pennsylvania, state lawmakers are increasingly talking about making the commonwealth’s energy network greener. But underlying those discussions are big questions about the future of the state’s electrical grid.

Major policy decisions are on the table, like regulating new hydrogen production and carbon capture industries, capping emissions, and speeding up permitting.

But many Republicans say they’re concerned that in the coming years, energy production will fall short of growing demand — both from Pennsylvania residents and from entities outside of the state that purchase its power. They also fear that passing legislation to incentivize clean energy production or capping emissions will worsen shortages.

Environmental advocates say concerns about grid reliability are exaggerated and serve as excuses to slow the clean energy transition. Many also argue that clean energy is the solution to potential shortages.

Pennsylvania gets its electricity from PJM, a grid operator that serves 13 states in the Northeast and Midwest.

PJM oversees a marketplace in which producers, like natural gas and coal plants and a smaller number of solar, wind, and other renewable energy producers, participate. Utilities can then buy the electricity generated by these producers and supply it to homes and businesses.

Pennsylvania is a major supplier of energy to PJM’s grid, accounting for up to a quarter of the total electricity produced, and is the second biggest energy producer in the country.

In recent years, PJM has reported multiple times that its energy demand is set to outpace its energy production, especially as more power plants close. The company has predicted that over a fifth of its existing power generators, largely coal and natural gas plants, will retire by 2030.

Some states have already had issues meeting demand. In Maryland, a coal power plant notified PJM that it intended to close down, but PJM found that shuttering it would negatively affect grid reliability and refused to approve its closure. The plant, Brandon Shores, has been forced to stay open and could continue operating until 2028. Environmental advocates accused PJM of lacking foresight during its planning of the plant’s closure.

Republicans in Harrisburg say incidents like this make them wary of transitioning away from coal and natural gas too quickly.

“I think the PJM has a real crisis looming on its hands,” state Senate Majority Leader Joe Pittman (R., Indiana) told Spotlight PA. “I see no real reliable plan to replace the megawatts that are due to come offline in the next few short years.”

Pittman said that energy production from natural gas and coal is essential to a reliable grid, and supports an all-of-the-above approach to energy. He argued for reducing permitting requirements for natural gas and oil companies, opposing any cap-and-trade program that would put a price tag on carbon emissions, and buildout of nuclear plants and carbon capture.

“There’s no secret that the demand for electricity is growing. It’s growing more rapidly than anybody anticipated,” Pittman said. “So we have to be very honest with ourselves that it’s going to take all forms of electricity production to ensure we have a stable grid.”

Environmental advocates agree that the deficit between energy production and demand has increased and will continue to grow, but they argue the issue can be solved by federal regulators and PJM speeding up the approval and construction of clean energy projects.

Tom Rutigliano, a senior advocate for the Natural Resources Defense Council who focuses on PJM, said no proposal is being considered in Pennsylvania that would immediately shut down all gas or coal power plants. He added, many grid concerns could be solved by PJM speeding up its approval process for new energy producers, most of which are solar.

“PJM has to be able to get these new power plants connected much, much quicker than they are and they’ve proven unable to keep pace with getting the new plants on in turn to keep up with the retirements,” Rutigliano said.

According to Rutigliano, PJM’s approval procedure was meant to handle a small number of connection requests from generators with large capacities, like coal and natural gas plants.

However, over 90% of the current projects awaiting approval from PJM are from renewable sources such as solar and wind, which generate less energy but would be much more numerous.

A companion bill moving through the House would raise the annual cap to $20 million. The legislation was recently voted out of committee, moving it one step closer to passage.

Neither measure faces much opposition.

Paul Steinke, executive director of the Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia, isn’t surprised about the bipartisan support. He said the state’s tax credit program is an economic engine, creating jobs and tax revenue as properties return to productive use.

He calls the program a “win-win” for “everyone who cares about the health and vitality of our cities and towns across the commonwealth.”

“If you take a vacant building that’s contributing little to nothing to the tax rolls and you fill it with residents or with offices or with businesses, retail or restaurants, the impact on those communities is immediate and can be transformative in terms of revitalizing small towns and big cities across the state,” Steinke said.

Advocates say the program also poses little financial risk to the state.

Under the program, developers who are awarded these tax credits do not receive the subsidy until the project is completed. The funding can still be used to leverage other financing, including the construction loans many developers rely on to complete these projects.

“And if the project doesn’t happen, the tax credit won’t go out,” said Crawford.

Developer David Waxman has applied for and received historic preservation tax credits for three projects in Philadelphia, including the $42 million revamp of a historic brewery.

The hulking brick building in Brewerytown dates back to 1870. It was used to make beer until Prohibition, and later became warehouse space before returning to its sudsy roots for a time.

The building remained vacant for nearly two decades when MMPartners acquired it in 2019.

“It was blighted, and another year or two of sitting it probably would have been beyond repair and torn down. And so then you would have had this gem that spoke to the history of the neighborhood gone and replaced with what we like to call spaceship buildings — these new build mid-rises with 10 materials on the facade and kind of built like crap,” Waxman said.

MMPartners transformed the dilapidated building into Poth Brewery Lofts, a mixed-use development with more than 100 apartments and 25,000 square feet of commercial space.