Op-Ed: Tax Fracking Before Tolling Route 422

Editor's Note: This is an opinion piece and does not necessarily reflect the views of Phoenixville Patch. To express your own long-form opinion, e-mail me at Lynn.Jusinski@patch.com. 

Tuesday night Mike Vereb (R-150) used the  auditorium to present on the topic of 422 tolling. I am glad that there were no striking teachers outside. I would not have attended the meeting if I had to cross a picket line.

With Rep. Vereb were GOP representatives, most from districts that border this roadway: Warren Kampf (R-157), Tom Quigley (R-146) and Marcy Toepel (R-147). Also attending were Democratic County Commissioner Joe Hoeffel, the Executive Director of the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission Barry Seymour (I think he has to be politically neutered before speaking …) and an editor/GOP political operative of a local newspaper.

Who was NOT there was just as interesting. GOP State Sen. John Rafferty (R-44), who heads the Transportation sub-committee, was not there and neither was Democratic Rep. Tim Briggs (D-149) of Upper Merion, the eastern terminus of 422.

For there to be a 422 toll there needs to be a 422 tolling authority created by the legislature. This is what Hoeffel has pushed for in the past. However, since Sen. Rafferty has already clearly stated that any such movement will not happen and the majority of legislators of the affected area are already set against tolling, who would vote for this in Harrisburg if the locals don’t want it? Seriously, would some Representative in Sullivan County have the guts to tell us what to do down here?  It is above County Commissioner Joe Hoeffel’s power alone to do this.

Was this some sort of a Kabuki theater? Questions were taken from the audience. Cards were vetted and passed to Vereb, who did a good job deciphering the chicken scratch. It was obvious from the questions that the populace didn’t like trains or taxes. They might be able to live with an increase in gas taxes.

But for full corps of elected officials on stage, it was Seymour who was answering the lion’s share of the questions. It almost got to the point of, "What do our elected officials know?"

On one level that is OK, but Mr. Seymour is clearly in the camp of wanting to toll 422. When he repeatedly said that not all of the analysis has been done, I started to wonder, "What are we doing here?" A lot of people were worked up about half-baked plans.

Since the issue of tolling is essentially dead by looking at the legislative and popular moods in the room (I could have run a concession stand outside the auditorium selling farm implements to help the protestors of the tolls on the inside), the question I wanted answered was—Can we tax da frackers of Marcellus Shale?   

My card did not survive the vetting process.

After the forum ended I went to speak to the representatives directly and was able to ask three of them. Rep. Vereb clearly wanted to do it until I mentioned that he would be going up against a governor that has already stated he won’t tax anything. He then corrected me to say it is an impact fee.

It was almost funny playing the semantics game of “it’s not a tax but an ‘impact fee.’” If the government is going to take money away from a person or entity when they do something—it is a tax. But OK, an "impact fee"—a warping of the language that will somehow allow Gov. Corbett to raise a tax on the insane amount of fracking material most of the state is living on top of. It is a tax on the drillers.

Rep. Quigley had an interesting answer. Since impact fees can only be levied for an area around the project, the impact fees would allow other monies to be freed up to be spent in other parts of the state. If there was a fee for da fracking in Frackville (a nice little place upstate), da Frackville Fracking Impact Fee would stay in Frackville. But Frackville would receive fewer resources, freeing more cash to the rest of the state (hopefully getting a bridge over the Schuylkill and relieve the need for a toll). He seems very open to this idea.

Rep. Toepel is open to the idea of using impact fees to solve this issue, but she wants to see more about it. She was also concerned that the oil and gas companies would go somewhere else to frack for fun and profit if we were too harsh with them.

I think some people would argue that it would be a good idea to get harsh with the oil and gas people as they question what the environmental impact of the whole business of fracking is.

If we are going to have fracking in this state it has to pay for something, whether it's bridges and roads, education or just a new outfit for Gus the lottery groundhog.

So I guess if we don’t call it a tax we may be able to get the cash we need to fix the bridges.

Hmmmm, the heck with it ...

Tax da Frackers!!!