Lois Bower-Bjornson
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?
Yes absolutely. PFAS chemicals are forever chemicals in other words they never go away. PFAS has been used since the 1940’s in everything from carpet to baby products, non stick pots and pans, makeup, most household products, wrappers for food such as microwave popcorn bags, pizza boxes and firefighting foam, water and stain resistance products.
Health risk include:
- Cancer: Increased risk of kidney, prostate, and testicular cancers.
- Hormonal Disruption: Potential interference with endocrine functions, affecting reproductive health and development.
- Immune System Effects: Reduced vaccine response and increased susceptibility to infections.
- Metabolic Issues: Links to obesity, dyslipidemia, and other metabolic disorders
On a personal note my cousin’s are professional firefighters. The eldest brother developed cancer due directly to his exposure to PFAS in fire fighting foam.
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?
Unfortunately, due to misinformation to the public some parents are now concerned with vaccinating their children. Rather than isolating, the parents that do not want to vaccinate their children, I think it is best too, inform them of their choices and consequences to what may happen to not only their child but other people’s children’s due to no vaccinations.
As a mother of four, I believe strongly in vaccinating, that being said, I did have a few reservations with some of the vaccines. However, I spoke with my children’s pediatrician and she was able to give me facts based on science to put my mind at ease. This is the approach that we need to take with parents that are concerned with vaccines for their children. Rather than demonizing them we need to help them make an informed decision.
I would support policies that were centered around science and facts rather than fear.
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?
I support all policies that strengthen the states preparedness for the influenza outbreak. Unfortunately, due to industrialized farming some of these outbreaks are unavoidable. However, precautions that both the poultry and dairy industry take are sufficient, but could be improved.
Improvements could be made with more frequent testing of both animals and farm workers for the influenza virus. Animals that were allowed to be free range could possibly reduce the spread of the virus. Rather isolating, the infected animals from the uninfected animals.
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?
Yes Pennsylvania is the nation second largest producer of natural gas. Texas is the first. The difference between Texas and Pennsylvania is this property owners wether private or corporate are allowed to have any form of energy on their property.
The same policy should be instituted in Pennsylvania. If we are going to be an energy producing state, we should produce all forms of energy. This diversifies us makes us more marketable to the rest of the world and keeps us safer. During wars the first infrastructure that is targeted are Oil & Gas facilities. It is rare that wind turbines, solar panels, or Hydro electric sources are targeted.
Pennsylvania should be the leader in energy and the trendsetters of what to do with different forms of energy.
Unfortunately, this is all market driven. If the subsidies that Oil & Gas receives were shifted to clean renewable energy, then things would flip and change to renewable energy. There is plenty of room for renewable energy as well as fossil fuel energy.
There should be equal subsidies distribution to each form of energy production. All of this comes down to Pennsylvania’s do not have a choice. We should be able to have a choice of the energy that we want for ourselves our communities and our state.
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?
All of the cost should go to data center developers. Communities do not want data centers. They do not want the increase in their utilities. They do not want their water to be taken and their air to be poisoned from data centers that will be fueled with more fracked gas.
Therefore polluting communities more and then asking them to pay for the developers. How is this fair? There should be mandated reporting from an outside organization on all power, water and public reporting before process moves forward.
Communities do not have any input when a data center is coming into their town. This is unfair. It is unAmerican. The people that are living next to these data centers should have a say in what is going on where they live and should not be responsible for paying for something that they do not want in their communities.