Mandy Steele
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. Pennsylvania should restrict PFAS in consumer products when safer alternatives are available. PFAS are persistent “forever chemicals” that can remain in our environment and bodies for years, and research has linked exposure to certain PFAS with serious health concerns, including immune system effects, increased cholesterol, pregnancy-related hypertension, and certain cancers. I have supported legislation to address PFAS, including HB 2145, which would prohibit PFAS in certain consumer products, as well as legislation addressing PFAS in firefighting equipment. Our decisions should be guided by peer-reviewed epidemiological and toxicological research, exposure data, environmental persistence, and guidance from agencies such as the CDC and EPA. Where the scientific evidence demonstrates a meaningful risk and safer alternatives exist, we should act to protect Pennsylvanians from unnecessary exposure.
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?
I believe the best way to address vaccine concerns is through respectful, honest conversations and clear, evidence-based information. People deserve to have their questions taken seriously, and public health officials should work with trusted community leaders, healthcare providers, schools, and local organizations to make accurate information accessible. The science is clear that measles is highly contagious and that two doses of the MMR vaccine are about 97% effective at preventing measles. The vaccine has also been extensively studied and monitored for safety. As a legislator, I support policies that make vaccines readily accessible, strengthen public health infrastructure, improve vaccine education, and maintain appropriate school immunization requirements. Pennsylvania’s current outbreak demonstrates the importance of protecting both individual health and our communities, particularly children and people who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons.
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?
Pennsylvania should continue investing in rapid testing, disease surveillance, biosecurity, and the resources farmers need to respond quickly to outbreaks. Our poultry and dairy industries are critical to Pennsylvania’s economy, and protecting them requires close coordination between farmers, veterinarians, the Department of Agriculture, and federal partners. Pennsylvania has already expanded testing capacity and established recovery and biosecurity grants, and I support maintaining and strengthening those investments. Protecting farm workers must be a central part of our response. I would prioritize access to appropriate PPE, worker training, seasonal flu vaccination, occupational health monitoring, and clear guidance for workers who may have been exposed. Most importantly, we need to listen to farmers and agricultural communities and make sure they have the resources to implement strong biosecurity practices before an outbreak occurs, rather than waiting until it is too late.
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?
Pennsylvania should use its existing energy strengths while making a significant shift toward cleaner energy. Natural gas and nuclear power currently play major roles in our electricity system, but Pennsylvania also has enormous potential to expand solar, wind, hydropower, battery storage, and other clean technologies. Renewable energy currently represents only a small share of Pennsylvania’s electricity generation, while energy production and consumption account for nearly 90% of the state’s greenhouse gas emissions. I support updating Pennsylvania’s energy standards to encourage substantially more renewable generation, expanding community solar, streamlining responsible clean-energy development, and investing in energy efficiency and grid modernization. We should also make sure new energy development creates good-paying Pennsylvania jobs. Our energy policy should protect affordability and reliability while moving us toward a cleaner, more diverse energy portfolio that reduces pollution and protects our environment.
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?
Large data centers should not move forward at the expense of the communities that host them. Developers should be responsible for the full costs their projects impose on the electric grid, water systems, roads, and other public infrastructure, not ordinary ratepayers. I support strong requirements for energy and water conservation, clean energy, and transparent reporting of a facility’s projected and actual electricity and water use. Most importantly, communities must have a meaningful voice before a project is approved. Residents should receive timely, accessible information and have opportunities for public meetings, hearings, and input early enough to influence major project decisions. Developers should also negotiate community benefit agreements addressing local priorities. Pennsylvania has already taken steps in this direction through the GRID standards, including requirements for local approval, transparency, community engagement, and environmental protections. As a legislator, I will continue advocating for strong oversight, transparency, environmental protection, and local control so economic development benefits the communities where it occurs.