Margaret Burke
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?
PFAS chemicals are used in many products because they have tight chemical bonds that make them resistant to heat and staining. The ‘impenetrability’ that makes PFAS useful in products also makes them “forever chemicals”, breaking down slowly and remaining in our environment for long periods of time. Because PFAS chemicals are water-soluble, they cycle between our air, ground and drinking water. When products contain PFAS, those chemicals eventually make their way into our bodies.
Human consumption of PFAS is linked to, among other things, cancers, immune, cardiac and reproductive problems. Therefore, I support House Bill 2145 to restrict PFAS use in consumer products. The data that supports this decision include water and soil sample testing that show the chemicals are long lived as well as serum samples that show PFAS chemicals are not quickly cleared from human bodies. The link to health problems was made by studying populations with high levels of occupational PFAS exposure.
One caveat is that if PFAS is banned, companies likely would replace them with other chemicals with similar “impenetrable” chemical properties and we don’t know the health impacts of widespread exposure to those chemicals. We must be vigilant in monitoring the impact of any replacements.
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?
It’s now 132 cases- 27 in the last seven days! None were fully vaccinated. Vaccines have become victims of their own success. When polio raged, American citizens contributed dimes to find a way to prevent it and parents rushed to vaccinate their children. Today’s parents haven’t experienced these vaccine-preventable diseases which can make them fear vaccination more than disease. Now vaccination rates are falling below levels that stop the spread of infectious disease.
With a vaccine skeptic heading HHS and the CDC pausing vaccine-preventable disease surveillance reporting, it’s unlikely the federal government will encourage vaccination. Our state priorities are in collecting and reporting infectious disease data and making health professionals aware of outbreaks to enable vaccination for those at highest risk in the zone of infection. With data, we can transparently explain that vaccination reduces infections and disease severity.
The state should launch state-wide awareness campaigns and provide materials to doctors, especially pediatricians, to encourage protection by vaccination. Studies show the best way to increase vaccination rates is for people to see other people being vaccinated. Ad campaigns should highlight parents who have protected their children from measles outbreaks and other diseases through vaccination.
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?
The key to reducing the impact of outbreaks is to be proactive in early detection and prevention as opposed to mounting an expensive reactive response. Staffing cuts at key federal agencies threaten rapid responses to infectious disease outbreaks in livestock that damage our food supply, our health and our economy.
Agriculture is a major part of Pennsylvania’s economy and we have strong animal health and disease control standards. As a scientist, I rely on data to make decisions. Without a strong surveillance partner in the Federal government, Pennsylvania needs to be prepared to protect workers and animals from diseases spreading from other states and the broader public from potentially infected food supplied from outside the state. We must continue to fund a strong testing and reporting system to monitor diseases and rapidly respond.
The state can impose quarantines, restrict animal movement, conduct trace investigations, and coordinate depopulation and cleaning measures when a serious disease is detected. However, tracing and stopping infections and food-borne illnesses originating from outside of the state will likely always require a robust federal response. When that wanes, all states will be at a higher risk because an effective response needs to include federal cooperation.
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 a scientist, I know climate change driven by greenhouse gas emissions is real and is bringing more extreme weather, flooding, and droughts that threaten our ecosystems, food supply, economy, and safety. In my home district, Perkiomen Valley Watershed flooding has already become more frequent and more dangerous.
As a mom, I know we can’t afford to ignore it. In Pennsylvania, where we have a constitutional right to clean air and pure water, it is more imperative than ever that we pass stronger legislation to limit greenhouse gas emissions. We must transition away from fossil fuels and towards clean energy generation.
I support the Pennsylvania Climate Emissions Reduction (PACER) initiative and the Pennsylvania Reliable Energy Sustainability Standard (PRESS). PACER would establish a PA-specific cap on carbon dioxide emissions from power plants and require large power plants to purchase allowances for carbon dioxide emissions (cap and trade). The cap would be lowered over time making allowances more expensive thusly those market forces would encourage development of more clean energy sources over time. PRESS would require 35% of electricity to come from clean sources like solar and wind by 2035 moving the state away from fossil fuels.
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?
Right now in Pennsylvania, residential electric rate payers are subsidizing energy-hungry data center power use. Our rates are skyrocketing while corporations profit and that is not fair. Data centers should be required to supply their own clean energy sources so as not to drive up residential energy costs or pollute the environment. There are few limits to data center development other than often out-dated local zoning ordinances. I support putting legislative guardrails in place at a state level for data center development and operation including: water and energy use reporting, requiring transparency during development so townships and the public have time to properly discuss and plan, zoning assistance from the state to help townships update their zoning laws and enforce those laws if challenged, energy efficiency standards, emergency planning, requiring developers to pay for infrastructure completed in support of projects they later abandon, “good neighbor” provisions like creating long-term local jobs. In Pennsylvania, developers are exempt from sales tax for materials used to build data centers. A corporate benefit projected to cost two billion dollars in lost tax revenues. I support removing this tax exemption.