Lisa Boscola
DemocraticQ1 PFAS chemicals are widely used in consumer products but have raised health concerns due to their persistence in the environment and humans, and some Pennsylvanian legislators are considering restrictions on its use, such as in House Bill 2145. Should Pennsylvania restrict PFAS in consumer products? What scientific evidence would you use to inform your decision?
I believe we should be talking about restrictions for intentionally added PFAS. The science shows a health risk and safer alternatives are available. That said, the politics require we give manufacturers reasonable time to adjust while protecting consumers from preventable exposure. That is critical to enacting any change that stands to succeed.
At its core, the public deserves to know what is in the products they buy. That is why I proposed requiring manufacturers to disclose intentionally added PFAS in products and packaging and back up their “PFAS-free” claims.
I have also spent a lot of my work focusing on addressing contamination already in our drinking water. I serve on the drinking water investment board, PENNVEST, where investments in PFAS treatment help communities protect public health and meet federal drinking water standards. I support continuing that work while helping water systems afford treatment without placing the full burden on ratepayers.
In all of this, my decisions aim to be guided by peer-reviewed research and independent scientific assessments with the goal to reduce exposure, clean up existing contamination, and make sure we move forward in the right direction.
Q2 Measles vaccination rates in Pennsylvania have declined in recent years, from 95.5% in 2020 to 92.5% in 2025. At the same time, measles outbreaks have emerged across the state, with 62 confirmed cases in PA in 2026. As a policymaker, how do you approach engaging with communities that have concerns that center on infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety, and what policies, if any, would you support related to these issues?
We need to listen to parents and take their questions seriously. Talking down to people will not build confidence in vaccines or government. The science strongly supports measles vaccination, and I encourage families to talk with their pediatricians and other trusted health professionals about the benefits and risks.
We also need to make getting vaccinated easier. I supported legislation in 2022 (Act 80) and 2024 (Act 77) that expanded pharmacists’ and trained pharmacy interns’ ability to vaccinate children, including flu and COVID shots for ages 5 and older and other immunizations for ages 8 and older. We also allowed trained pharmacy technicians to administer flu and COVID shots to patients ages 13 and older under pharmacist supervision, while maintaining safety standards and parental consent.
Our local health departments need the resources to reach families and respond quickly to outbreaks. People deserve straight answers, trusted guidance, and access to care.
Q3 There have been avian influenza outbreaks in Pennsylvania, with potential impacts on poultry and dairy operations, both industries that provide billions of dollars of economic value to the state. What policies, if any, do you support to strengthen the state’s preparedness and outbreak response? Are there specific strategies you would prioritize to protect farm workers, agricultural communities, and the broader public?
Our farmers need the tools to catch outbreaks early, contain them quickly, and recover from losses. I have supported funding for Penn Vet, whose diagnostic laboratory at New Bolton Center plays an important role in avian flu testing and research. Those investments give farmers and state officials the information they need to act quickly.
Avian flu also hits families and businesses through higher prices for eggs and foods made with them. That makes our response a public health and agricultural priority, as well as an affordability issue that elected officials need to take seriously.
I support practical disease prevention measures on farms, protective equipment and training for workers, and prompt access to testing and treatment after exposure. When outbreaks hit, farmers need timely financial assistance to recover. Protecting our food supply means supporting the people who produce it and following the science.
Q4 Pennsylvania is the nation’s second-largest producer of natural gas and nuclear energy, as well as the third-largest producer of coal, per the Energy Information Administration. In contrast, PA currently ranks 45th in the country in terms of wind, solar, and hydropower energy production. How do you think these energy sources should be distributed across PA’s energy production portfolio, and what policies, if any, would you support to facilitate this?
As Democratic chair of the Senate Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure Committee, I have spent years working on energy policy and its impact on ratepayers. My priorities have always been to keep the lights on, keep bills affordable, and make sure Pennsylvania remains an energy leader.
To that end, I support a diverse mix that builds on our base generation as well as expanding our solar, wind, and hydropower generation. The balance should reflect costs, reliability, and environmental impacts.
Additionally, I introduced the Smart Solar Siting Act (SB1019) to encourage solar on warehouse rooftops and other suitable sites while protecting farmland, open space, and ratepayers. I also introduced legislation to modernize Act 129’s energy efficiency programs. Helping families and businesses use less electricity can lower bills and ease pressure on the grid.
In all, we need to respond to the rising demand for electricity and build out the infrastructure to deliver it. After years in this space, I know that an energy policy only works if it delivers dependable service at a price people can afford.
Q5 Pennsylvania has proposed more reporting, utility oversight, and zoning guidance for large data centers, along with shifting some generation, capacity, and reliability costs onto data center developers rather than ordinary ratepayers. How should the costs and benefits of large data center development be divided between developers and the public, and what requirements, if any, would you support on power, water, and public reporting before a project moves forward?
Some communities may want a data center, while others may not. Those local decisions deserve respect. For the projects that move forward, we need clear guardrails to protect electric bills, grid reliability, water supplies, and surrounding neighborhoods.
That is why I laid out my stance in a six-part consumer protection package to prevent cost shifting, strengthen PUC oversight, protect reliability, and return an impact fee to affected customers through bill credits. I also voted to repeal the data center equipment sales tax exemption.
I supported Governor Shapiro’s executive order requiring local approvals, energy and water reporting, and binding GRID commitments. Those protections should be written into law.
Before projects move forward, residents deserve clear information about power demand, water use, and infrastructure impacts, along with enforceable local safeguards. Developers must pay the costs they create. Families and small businesses should not be left footing the bill.