In Crucial Pennsylvania, Democrats Worry a Fracking Ban Could Sink Them (York: attorney, home)

[KoNgFooCj]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/27/u...-fracking.html

[rowhomecity]

I agree. I am a pro fracking dem. Warren makes me nervous she would not win PA.

[Dequindre]

That worry is justified. Fracking provides many family-sustaining jobs in counties where it is otherwise difficult to find work.

[Independentthinking83]

Originally Posted by rowhomecity

I agree. I am a pro fracking dem. Warren makes me nervous she would not win PA.

Democrats are going to have a hard time winning the electoral college. I could see the Democrat get over 50 percent of the vote and trump 44-47 percent but still win the electoral college. The democrats have a working class voter problem now. These folks propelled Obama to victory in 2008 and 2012. By the end of Obama’s term the younger generation began to gain foothold in the party showing more of a concern for gay rights, bathroom sharing, banning fracking and staunch environmental regulations as opposed to jobs and the economy. It cost them in 2016 and will probably cost them in 2020. It is a losing message to Pennsylvania and Midwest voters. Maybe trump loses Michigan because I think it’s more liberal than pa, but gets 46 percent of the vote and wins the electoral college.

[jtab4994]

I understand that Warren may be tacking left just for the primary and if she wins the nomination she'd probably abandon the proposed fracking ban. But running against Trump as a Standard Politician who tells the expected lies isn't going to work.

IMO the Democrats' best chance in 2020 is Bernie, believe it or not, because he's the only current candidate who is genuine. But the Establishment is scared to death of him, and you may see Bloomberg emerge from Milwaukee with the nomination. In other words, the Establishment would rather lose with one of their own than with an insurgent. Biden would have won in 2016 but he is just too frail now. The Establishment knows that Biden just can't make it and shouldn't be running, but they are cynically using him as a bulwark against Bernie.

[Wells5]

It's not Warren but Maura Healy, the Massachusetts attorney general, who has single handedly blocked 2 major natural gas pipelines to New England- Northeast Energy Direct and the Access Northeast pipelines. Andrew Cuomo, the New York governor has blocked the Constitution Pipeline from Susquehanna County to near Albany, which would bring PA natural gas into New York City and NJ governor Phil Murphy has blocked the Penn East pipeline from Luzerne County to Mercer County, NJ.


They are pledged to oppose fracked gas. All are also opposed to nuclear power.


These Democrats are not progressives but regressives.

[thedirtypirate]

Originally Posted by Wells5

It's not Warren but Maura Healy, the Massachusetts attorney general, who has single handedly blocked 2 major natural gas pipelines to New England- Northeast Energy Direct and the Access Northeast pipelines. Andrew Cuomo, the New York governor has blocked the Constitution Pipeline from Susquehanna County to near Albany, which would bring PA natural gas into New York City and NJ governor Phil Murphy has blocked the Penn East pipeline from Luzerne County to Mercer County, NJ.


They are pledged to oppose fracked gas. All are also opposed to nuclear power.


These Democrats are not progressives but regressives.

I mean different places have different priorities. They don't see a need for the natural gas, and they could care less about the economic impact it has in a different state.

Hindsight is always 20/20, but the dirty truth of the matter is that Pennsylvania tied itself to energy companies through the pension systems.

The state operates two pension systems, PSERS and SERS, the system for all other state employees. Both funds are loaded with fossil fuel holdings, including those of many of the companies operating right here in Pennsylvania, the ones state employees are supposed to be regulating. Whether or not that potential conflict of interest actually breaches the law, it certainly gives the appearance of impropriety and, at the very least, demonstrates a pro-fossil fuels attitude that pervades our state government. Twenty-nine of the top 32 investments on the PSERS list are fossil fuel companies, although many others can be found farther down on the list on 1,150 holdings. Of the top ten holdings, nine are fossil fuel companies. Six of them operate in Pennsylvania, including some of the companies that have gained notoriety since the fracking boom began.

Investigation: PA Pension Systems PSERS & SERS Loaded With Fossil Fuel Holdings


It's massive mistake which isn't even giving good returns. Too late now.

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by Dequindre

That worry is justified. Fracking provides many family-sustaining jobs in counties where it is otherwise difficult to find work.

Whether you work in that field or not it should be a concern no matter who you are. When it's January, 0 degrees out, the wind isn't blowing and utilities are hitting record demand at 7AM those solar panels and windmills aren't going to heat your house...

[jtab4994]

Originally Posted by thedirtypirate

I mean different places have different priorities. They don't see a need for the natural gas, and they could care less about the economic impact it has in a different state.

NJ and NY residents and businesses would benefit from lower natural gas prices. That impacts families and the economies in their home states.

Hindsight is always 20/20, but the dirty truth of the matter is that Pennsylvania tied itself to energy companies through the pension systems.


Investigation: PA Pension Systems PSERS & SERS Loaded With Fossil Fuel Holdings


It's massive mistake which isn't even giving good returns. Too late now.

That article is from the Huffington Post. Which may explain why owning fossil fuel companies in a stock portfolio is called a "dirty truth".

And if you think it's a great idea for politicians to oppose fracking, then send them money and vote for them.

[thedirtypirate]

Originally Posted by jtab4994

NJ and NY residents and businesses would benefit from lower natural gas prices. That impacts families and the economies in their home states.

Maybe in the short term, but renewable fuel technology is advancing at such a rate, most fossil fuels will become obsolete in the coming decades.

That article is from the Huffington Post. Which may explain why owning fossil fuel companies in a stock portfolio is called a "dirty truth".

..I called it a dirty truth. I did purposely use the word as a double entendre.

And if you think it's a great idea for politicians to oppose fracking, then send them money and vote for them.

Did I say that? I simply was stating the rationale behind the choice to block the Pennsylvania pipelines.