Pennsylvania

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 PA Dept. Of Agriculture and the USDA APHIS program provide set procedures to prevent the spread of bird flu. This includes bio-security practices, preventing wild bird contact, water/food security, sanitizing requirements, and quarantine/monitoring, to name a few. As an elected official, I would work with stakeholders in this effort and continue supporting current legislation (HB324, funding for testing, prevention, and recovery) thereby ensuring that PA farmers have what they need to be successful while protecting food safety.

KEYWORDS: PDA, USDA APHIS, required practices, stakes, funding, HB324, farmers, successful

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 would support policies which would strengthen prevention and quick response to any outbreaks.

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?

Strengthening Pennsylvania’s response to the avian influenza will require our ability to do diagnostic testing and enforcing strict biosecurity measures. As a state we need to ensure the necessary funding and support for the health monitoring systems we have in place here in Pennsylvania. Finally, there needs to be interagency cooperation between the USDA and our own Department of Agriculture to make sure emergency outbreaks are efficient and effective.

KEYWORDS: diagnostic testing, biosecurity, cooperation

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 supported poultry technician licensing reform to try and get more inspectors on the ground to assist in addressing the outbreaks and make sure current regulations are being followed and enforced.

We need to make sure there is a focus on biosecurity and ensure that whether commercial or backyard, all poultry operations are registered. We need to invest more dollars in making sure there is broad awareness of the dangers of avian flu and that those in the business are following standards to help prevent the spread. More people committed to this effort would be helpful.

KEYWORDS: Inspectors, Awareness, Enforcement

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.

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.

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 have worked with my colleagues to increase funding for programs that do research through Pan and continue to monitor what happens around the world with the national council of state legislators so that we have the best practices available to fight against this bird flu

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.

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?

Support HB995 and for increased funding for preparedness. The governor’s recent enhancement in the latest budget aims to both increase funds and has planning in place to grow, improve, and prioritize the workers, communities, and broader public. Education and public notification are paramount elements along with having the resources and trained staff at the ready to contain any outbreaks.

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’s farms are the backbone of our economy, and we need to protect them like we protect our favorite fishing spots — carefully and with respect. I back strong biosecurity measures and quick response plans, but also believe in empowering farmers with organic and sustainable practices from the MAHA movement to naturally boost resilience.

Education and cooperation between farmers and the state are key — no one wants unnecessary red tape slowing down a farmer trying to get eggs on our tables.

KEYWORDS: biosecurity, organic farming, farmer support

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 farmers are essential to our food supply and rural communities. We need strong disease prevention and support for farmers when outbreaks occur—without unnecessary government mandates.

Government should work with farmers to protect our food supply, livelihoods, and communities while preserving the freedom to make informed choices.

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 one policy that I would not support is to immediately kill all birds once one is infected which then causes a crisis in both the poultry and the egg businesses. Since the risk to humans is very low, I would support the current method of precautions.

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 using personal protection equipment and implementing requirements with poultry & dairy herds to maintain written infection control plans, utilize respirators for high-risk tasks, gloves, coveralls, and eye protection. I also believe we need to implement a policy to adopt a tiered exposure categories in stages of high, medium, & low and match controls to mirror CDC’s admin control guidance and limit time & activities spent in high-exposure areas.

I also support the implementation of daily symptom checks & maintenance logs & an effort to create clear protocols. Mandating training on risks, PPE usages, reporting procedures which should be provided in all languages.

I feel agricultural employees should be required to complete these “continuing education programs”, when onboarding a new employee, and on an annual or every 2-yr basis.

KEYWORDS: PPE’s, infection control plans, symptom checks, protocols, mandated trainings

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 first responsibility of an elected U.S. Representative is to re-establish, then strengthen, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) so that it can properly respond to disasters such as avian influenza. This includes re-staffing the positions that were recently vacated through the deferred resignation program and the firing of those still in their probationary periods.

The second course of action is to prevent the Trump administration from ever negatively impacting FEMA again by impeaching him and Vance and removing them from office. Our national security is put at tremendous risk when our country cannot properly respond to disasters and mitigage the fallout. If the poultry and dairy industries cannot get the help they need from FEMA, then the food supply is reduced, and our people are more vulnerable to foreign influence.

KEYWORDS: FEMA, avian influenze

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?

As a candidate with an agricultural background, I personally understand the importance and the frailty of our agricultural institutions. I would fully support funding for dedicated research programs throughout the state aimed at a collaborative effort to study, track, and effectively communicate in a rapid response manner. Ideally, this would be combined with educational outreach programs available (perhaps through agricultural extension programs at state universities) to those in the agricultural fields to help mitigate potential disasters and to work collectively should an outbreak occur.

I would also support legislation to financially protect farmers and others in the agricultural community (outside of just poultry and dairy operations) during times of hardship caused by forces of nature; we need our farmers to help keep food on our plates.

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 robust funding for USDA so that our nation’s experts and leading agricultural scientist can collaborate both with Pennsylvania agencies and our world leading research universities.

One of the legislative efforts I have led to stop the spread of avian influenza outbreaks is the Mink VIRUS Act, which aims to phase out or ban captive mink operations. Documented evidence shows that species like mink can be high-risk viral reservoirs capable of contracting and mutating dangerous pathogens, including H5N1 avian influenza. Therefore, by promoting humane animal welfare, we can in the future stop these outbreaks at the source or at the very least, slow transmission.

KEYWORDS: Agriculture prevention research

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 state Department of Agriculture deploys health teams immediately when avian flu cases are detected to quarantine affected sites and oversee virus elimination. Dedicated funding is provided to help farmers recover from their loses and grant funding is also available to assist in making biosecurity upgrades.

These efforts should be strengthened for maximum effectiveness. It is imperative to protect farm workers by providing protective equipment, testing, symptom monitoring, and immediate medical care to those who are exposed or infected. Public reporting and effective food safety protocols can make agricultural communities and the public safe.

KEYWORDS: Food safety protocols

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?

As a RN I firmly believe in protection prior to outbreak. As such I would support increased protective methods with the first awareness of increased risk. I would also support increased research for both prevention and immediate response when an outbreak is noted.

KEYWORDS: Prevention, protection, research

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 take avian influenza seriously as both an agricultural threat and a public health threat. My approach would be to stay ahead of outbreaks instead of waiting until farms, workers, and local economies are already taking the hit. That means strong surveillance, fast reporting, clear quarantine protocols, and real support for producers who are being asked to absorb the cost of doing the right thing. It also means recognizing that poultry and dairy workers are often the first people exposed, so worker protection has to be part of the response, not an afterthought.

I would prioritize a few practical steps. First, strengthen testing and monitoring, including support for Pennsylvania’s dairy herd monitoring and mandatory milk testing programs, rapid diagnostics, and clear reporting lines between farmers, veterinarians, PDA, DOH, USDA, and the Game Commission. Second, help farms implement biosecurity with grants or cost-sharing for protective gear, sanitation supplies, traffic control measures, isolation space, and training, especially for smaller operators and backyard flocks that may not have the same resources as large commercial facilities. Third, protect workers with multilingual safety guidance, PPE access, exposure protocols, flu vaccination outreach, and the ability to stay home or seek care without fearing lost wages or retaliation. Fourth, make indemnification and recovery assistance move faster when flocks are culled or movement restrictions disrupt business. If the state asks producers to carry the burden of containment, the state should help carry the cost.

I would also emphasize honest public communication. People need to know that pasteurized milk remains safe, that properly handled poultry products are safe, and that the bigger risks are occupational exposure, spread between animals, and preventable breakdowns in surveillance and biosecurity. As of July 24, 2026, Pennsylvania reports no cases in dairy cattle, but the state is actively managing poultry outbreaks and has quarantine, testing, and movement restrictions around infected farms. The goal should be simple: contain outbreaks fast, protect workers, keep farms operating safely, and prevent an animal health crisis from becoming a broader public health problem.

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?

Avian influenza is a serious issue that causes shortages for our farmers, producers, and consumers. We need to invest in preventative measures while also ensuring we have better systems for reporting avian influenza.

I also believe we need to invest in the right equipment to ensure farmers have the resources they need to deal with these outbreaks.

KEYWORDS: Influenza, Poultry, Farmers

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?

Diseases like Avian Influenza devastate our agricultural industries, threaten the livelihoods of our small family farms, disrupt our economy, and create public health crises. I’ll work with scientists and the agricultural community to develop monitoring systems, emergency protocols, and health protections for farm workers.

A key part of keeping food affordable is preventing outbreaks that disrupt operations. As state representative, I’ll work with farmers across my district to address supply chain issues and bring costs down at the grocery store.

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 would support a science-based approach focused on rapid detection, strong farm biosecurity, worker protections, and clear communication. That includes testing and surveillance, PPE and training for farm workers, resources to help producers manage outbreaks and losses, and transparent public-health guidance. The goal should be to contain outbreaks quickly while protecting Pennsylvania’s farmers, agricultural economy, and broader public.

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?

Corporate agriculture deregulation has proven, over the last couple of years, to have disastrous consequences for the consuming public from a parade of food-born illnesses sparking recalls to explosive diarrhea from uninspected produce. Just last month (September) there were avian flu outbreaks in Minnesota, North and South Dakota, Indiana, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Montana with disastrous effects to poultry farms in those states. The most important policy, of a dual approach, is to continue adequately funding the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture (PDA) supporting surveillance protocols established to monitor commercial and “backyard” poultry flocks as well as dairy cattle herds for the disease. The PDA surveillance mission is also supported by the Pennsylvania Game Commission and the Penn State Extension program. With these agencies adequately funded I believe Pennsylvania can respond effectively to quell a serious avian flu outbreak. The second approach is to enact preventative regulations, as advised by the PDA in consultation with the poultry and dairy farming community, to prevent a serious financially disastrous outbreak of avian flu or any other diseases that could potentially devastate poultry flocks and dairy cattle herds.

KEYWORDS: avian flu, surveillance protocols

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 be ready to move quickly when an outbreak threatens our farms. I support reliable funding for veterinary testing, disease monitoring, and response teams, with farmers involved in planning before a crisis hits.

My priorities would be fast test results, practical help keeping disease off farms, and protective equipment and training for workers handling potentially infected animals. Exposed workers should have prompt access to confidential testing and medical care.

Quarantines or animal movement restrictions should follow veterinary evidence, with clear conditions for lifting them. When government orders flocks destroyed, eligible farmers need timely compensation and a straightforward claims process. Delays can put a family farm out of business.

I would build on existing state, federal, and agricultural extension services, track response times and spending, and give the public clear updates about exposure and food safety. Protecting farms and public health is a legitimate government responsibility. It needs to be done competently, with respect for the people whose livelihoods are at stake.

KEYWORDS: Farm biosecurity; Worker protection; Targeted response

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?

On the appropriations committee, I have always supported funding for the UPenn New Bolton Center. They are our only large animal research center and their work on Avian Flu probably saved the industry in PA. Headwinds coming from DC has been making this difficult.

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 farmers work too hard to have an outbreak wipe out everything they have built. We need to be ready before that happens, not scrambling after it does. I support strong testing so outbreaks can be found early and stopped before they spread. Farmers and farm workers should have quick access to testing, safety gear, and clear information about what is happening and what they need to do.

We also need to make sure farmers are not left with the bill when the state takes action to stop an outbreak. If animals must be destroyed to protect the public and other farms, farmers should get fair and fast help for their losses.

Most of all, state government needs to work with our farmers, not make their jobs harder with more red tape. We should listen to the people who work in agriculture every day, follow the science, and give them the tools they need to protect their farms, their workers, and our food supply.

KEYWORDS: Family Farms, Early Detection, Farm Workers

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 would support a coordinated, science-based response that helps farms detect outbreaks early, contain them quickly, and recover without being financially devastated. PA should continue investing in rapid testing, veterinary lab staffing, and practical biosecurity assistance for both commercial and smaller family-owned operations.

I also believe that the state should also maintain a recovery fund so farms and related businesses are not left carrying the full cost of an outbreak. PA has already expanded testing and response resources during the 2026 surge, and that capacity needs to be sustained so we can be proactive in the future, not simply reactive.

Worker protection is at the center of these efforts. I would prioritize free access to the appropriate protective equipment, training, paid time off in the event of a need for testing/isolation, and less barriers to workers who may have been exposed.

KEYWORDS: Public safety, worker support, proactive

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 best measure to prevent avian flu from infecting the human population is for people to get an annual flu shot. While it will not be a perfect match for the avian flu, it will add antibodies to the humans’ immune system that may reduce the likelihood of severe infection. Farm workers should practice good hygiene by washing their hands and wearing masks when around birds that show signs of illness. Farmers should fend against non-domesticated fowl infecting their flocks and should take rapid steps to separate sick birds from the rest. Very few human deaths have been ascribed to avian influenza. Deaths do occur from inoculations, with some attributing thousands to the two different COVID vaccines rolled out under emergency measures. At this point, the balance seems to point to continuing current policies, rather than instituting a general inoculation for avian influenza.

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?

Although my district is in a rural area, I am afraid that we do not actually have farmland in my district. I have to say I am not familiar with agricultural practices around livestock and infections therein. I would defer to experts on this matter and rely on them to guide me on how best to vote to protect our communities from this risk.

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?

Improving early detection of outbreaks and having a systems in place that minimize risk of spread and death in herds/flocks is important and needs to be a priority. Perhaps more funding to our land grant universities could help this effort. Standards to protect farm workers should be developed.

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?

As someone who believes in preparing before a crisis instead of reacting after one, I support strengthening Pennsylvania’s ability to detect and respond to avian influenza quickly. Protecting our poultry and dairy industries protects farmers, workers, consumers, and our economy.

I’d prioritize strong disease surveillance, rapid testing, clear communication between state agencies and producers, and resources to help farms improve biosecurity. Farm workers should have access to education, appropriate protective equipment when needed, and testing if they’re exposed.

I also believe farmers shouldn’t bear the financial burden alone when they’re doing the right thing by reporting outbreaks. Timely support and fair compensation help encourage transparency, which ultimately protects everyone.

As with any public health issue, decisions should be guided by the best available scientific evidence while recognizing the real-world impact on Pennsylvania families and businesses. Our goal should be to stop outbreaks early, protect our food supply, and keep agriculture strong without creating unnecessary burdens.

KEYWORDS: Biosecurity, Preparedness, Agriculture

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 would support expanding biosecurity education to include back yard flock owners. In addition, I would support policies like HB 324 that allows any legal resident to become a Certified Poultry Technician.

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’m the granddaughter of farmers, so I know what a flock or a herd means to a family. It’s their livelihood, and often generations of work. Avian flu has hit Pennsylvania’s poultry farms hard, and we should be prepared to keep our farms protected.

I’m still learning the details, so I wouldn’t arrive with a one-size-fits-all plan. I’d start by sitting down with farmers, farm workers, veterinarians, and public health experts and asking what they need. In general, I support strong testing and early warning, fair and timely help for farmers who lose animals, and protection for the people working closest to them, with clear information they can trust. State agriculture and health officials should work closely together and keep the public informed so people know when there’s a real risk and when there isn’t.

Solutions work best when the people living with the problem help shape them.

KEYWORDS: Avian Influenza, Preparedness, Farm Communities

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?

Agricultural threats are critical economic and health problems. My legislative stance directly intersects with agricultural and environmental issues, focusing on local preservation, protection, and food sustainability.

I am an advocate for sustainable development and protecting local farmland from unchecked urban sprawl and stormwater issues. Protecting Pennsylvanians from dangerous illness and a contaminated food supply is very important. Even invasive species like the Spotted Lantern Fly have brought millions of dollars of damage to Bucks County farmers. We must consider investing in scientific research and food safety, especially as funding cuts at the federal level jeopardize public safety.

KEYWORDS: protection, safety, investing

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?

As a Representative for my District I would implement processes to make locally grown and sourced food products more readily available to the local community. I don’t see the sense in buying out of State meat and vegetables when we have plenty available just down the road. You put these seeds in the ground and they make more of themselves, it’s simply incredible.

KEYWORDS: Local, community, available

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’s poultry and dairy industries are critical to our state’s economy, and protecting them from avian influenza requires a coordinated, science-based response. That’s why I voted for House Bill 324, which expanded Pennsylvania’s capacity to respond to avian influenza by increasing the number of certified poultry technicians available to conduct testing and surveillance.

Strengthening our ability to detect and respond to outbreaks helps protect farmers, workers, and consumers alike. I also support ensuring the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture has the resources it needs for disease surveillance, rapid testing, and timely communication with producers.

In addition, we should continue to provide assistance to farmers whose livestock are impacted, and ensure farm workers have access to appropriate protective equipment and public health guidance.

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?

We need to regulate the industrial slaughter of animals to reflect stronger standards on ethical consumption, health and quality life of animals and animal inspections. The money that was robbed by the Trump Administration from research regarding these subjects must be reinstated.

We could look to the European Union’s standards on industrial slaughter as a model of success, compared to the reckless environment our food standards operate under today. Humans and animals across Pennsylvania are served by stricter standards that emphasize safety for workers, animals and consumers.

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 am not prepared to answer this question. If elected, I would take any opportunity to discuss with health professionals and those in the agricultural community that have relevant first-hand knowledge.

Anything I would now offer in response would simply be a regurgitation of information found on Google searches, and not productive in assessing my scientific qualifications to serve as your legislator.

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?

As a community health nurse living alongside the families of House District 58, I know our dairy and poultry farms are the backbone of our economy and identity. Avian influenza is not just an agricultural threat; it is a critical public health vulnerability. If elected, I will champion evidence-based biosecurity and occupational health protocols to protect our community.

I support expanding state-funded, rapid on-farm diagnostic testing to catch outbreaks before they decimate flocks or herds. Crucially, we must protect our frontline agricultural workforce. I advocate for the distribution of stockpiled personal protective equipment (PPE)—such as properly fitted respirators and eye protection—specifically tailored to farm environments, coupled with multilingual health education on zoonotic transmission.

Furthermore, I will push for state-backed “no-fault” economic safety nets. If farmers face financial ruin for reporting sick livestock, containment fails. By guaranteeing fair, rapid compensation and mobile health surveillance vans to monitor worker health right on the farms, we protect both the agricultural supply chain and the broader public from viral mutation. We can secure our food supply and save livelihoods through proactive, trusted public health partnerships.

KEYWORDS: on-farm surveillance, Workforce-Biosecurity No-Fault-Compension

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?

We need to adequately fund and support the field work of the PA Department of Agriculture to monitor and when needed, take quick and decisive action to limit the spread of avian influenza.

I am not an expert in this area, so I would rely on the recommendations of agriculture and medical professionals to protect farm workers and the public.

KEYWORDS: Montior, decisive action

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’s poultry and dairy industries are pillars of our economy and way of life—worth billions and supporting thousands of family farms and workers. Avian influenza (HPAI/H5N1) has already cost our state millions of birds and put real pressure on producers. As a candidate who puts Pennsylvania’s agricultural communities first, I support practical, science-driven preparedness and rapid response that protects farms, workers, and the public without burying producers under red tape. Expand support for on-farm biosecurity upgrades, training, and equipment through grants and technical assistance. Keep our Pennsylvania Animal Diagnostic Laboratory System (PADLS) fully funded and ready for high-volume testing of poultry and milk so we catch problems early.

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?

Poultry and dairy farmers are key components in Pennsylvania’s ability to feed its people and maintain a bolstering economy. We must ensure these industries are stable and able to follow the sanitation practices that keep all of us safe. Politicians must listen to the farming experts, and work with them to develop practical policy. In an inflation crisis, farmers are struggling to afford the sanitation materials that keep their workers healthy and their animals insulated from disease; I will support funding that bridges these gaps. From state assistance grants to health policies that protect farmworkers and consumers alike, Harrisburg must work to build not only an outbreak response, but a framework to prevent the problem from ever escalating.

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?

Mandatory testing and quarantine/removal procedures of affected animals are critical to reduce the harm these outbreaks have.

As we saw in Texas earlier this year through the screwworm outbreak, we must always be vigilant and ready to take action, even when we believe to have all but eradicated a threat to the health of livestock and our food supply.

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?

As a policy maker, I would support, and co-sponsor legislature that invests in preventive measures, biosecurity, early detection, quarantine and treatment. To protect farm workers, agricultural communities and the public, I would outline best practices like use of PPE, sanitizing delivery vehicles, product movement protocol, guildline for farm access, etc.

KEYWORDS: avain flu, protect farms, biosecurity, poultry, dairy

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?

Protecting workers will always be a key priority of mine, and in this work, I would want to hear from farm workers what protections they would like to see in their workplace as the people exposed to outbreaks in their industries. Our agricultural communities are a major cornerstone of Pennsylvania’s economy and our preparations for responding to outbreaks should be prioritized to meet that need.

We have experienced the shortages and rising costs that follow in the wake of an outbreak and know that Pennsylvania families cannot accommodate rising costs in their every day grocery needs that help provide nutrition for their families.

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.

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’s agricultural industry is a critical part of our economy and our communities, and we must ensure we are prepared to respond quickly and effectively to threats like avian influenza. I support strengthening coordination between state agencies, farmers, veterinarians, public health officials, and local communities to improve preparedness, communication, and response efforts.

Protecting farm workers and agricultural communities must be a priority. I support ensuring that workers have access to appropriate training, protective equipment, and timely information about potential risks. We should also continue investing in surveillance, testing, and resources that help farmers identify and contain outbreaks while minimizing economic harm.

A strong response requires partnership. Farmers and agricultural professionals are on the front lines of protecting both their livelihoods and public health, and they should have a seat at the table when developing policies that impact their operations. By combining science-based strategies, strong communication, and support for our agricultural community, Pennsylvania can better protect workers, producers, and consumers.

KEYWORDS: Preparedness; Partnership; Education

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 PA’s HPAI Recovery Fund and the implementation of increasing biosecurity measures for commercial and backyard producers. I would support supplying personal protective equipment to producers to prevent the spread of avian influenza.

KEYWORDS: HPAI Recovery Fund

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 is the only state in the nation with a dedicated avian flu recovery fund, and I would support further funding this program to help our farmers recover and upgrade their farms to be safer from future outbreaks.

We should also guarantee full funding for our state’s dairy and poultry testing programs and Department of Agriculture rapid response teams to ensure we catch and address these outbreaks early. Other strategies we could pursue include providing state-subsidized protective equipment for farmers on the front lines of these outbreaks, clean wash stations, and basic, accessible biosecurity training for all employees.

Supporting the broader public means continuing to invest in and fund our state Department of Health, as well as engaging with national organizations that can provide critical support in the case of a larger outbreak. We need to make sure that our agricultural community, an industry that sustains over 600,000 jobs in the Commonwealth, remains strong, supported, and prepared.

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 sustained funding for rapid testing, laboratory capacity, veterinary response teams, and close coordination between agriculture and public health agencies. We should also help farms strengthen biosecurity and compensate producers for outbreak-related losses so they can report infections immediately.

Protecting workers must be central: free protective equipment and testing, multilingual health information, confidential symptom monitoring, and paid leave and medical care for anyone exposed or infected. Transparent public reporting and strong food-safety education will help protect agricultural communities and maintain public confidence.

KEYWORDS: Biosecurity, worker protection, rapid response

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?

To protect Pennsylvania’s food supply and agricultural economy from avian flu, policymakers should focus on early detection, strong farm biosecurity, and clear protections for workers. Grounded in veterinary science and public health research from trusted sources such as the PA Department of Agriculture, the USDA, Penn State Extension, and the CDC, my approach prioritizes expanding state lab testing so farmers can spot outbreaks early, funding direct on-farm prevention measures, and providing protective gear and health monitoring for farmworkers who handle animals daily.

KEYWORDS: One Health, biosecurity, prevention

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 must strengthen its preparedness and rapid response capabilities for avian influenza. This is both a public health issue and an economic one for our poultry and dairy industries.

I would support increased funding for surveillance, faster testing and reporting systems, and better coordination between state agencies, farmers, and federal partners. Protecting farm workers and agricultural communities should be a priority through proper protective equipment, training, and compensation support during outbreaks.

We also need stronger biosecurity standards and investment in research for better vaccines and containment strategies. A proactive, science-driven approach protects both public health and Pennsylvania’s agricultural economy.

KEYWORDS: Biosecurity, agricultural preparedness, rapid response

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 have followed this since the beginning. The only solution that officials have come up with is killing the birds and composting them. Avian keeps returning so what we are doing is not working.

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?

As an elected official, I would support a moratorium until more is known about the human and environmental impacts by data centers. I also support the requirements of HB 2151 as well as local municipalities updating their municipal planning codes (MPCs). The York County Planning Commission’s updated MPC is a template for other municipalities as well. We should ensure that data center developers do not receive financial incentives, no fast tracking, that decommissioning and remediation costs be posted in the form of an irrevocable escrow or similar mechanism, independent monitoring for environmental and human impacts with substantial monetary fines for violations. I do not recommend that being the first state with the most data centers is a sound approach to these facilities. I do recommend that extensive research is needed before proceeding with construction of these facilities. Resident input is crucial at the local level and at all levels.

KEYWORDS: Moratorium, HB 2151, MPC, independent monitoring, human, environment, monetary fines, violations resident input

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?

The first step in dealing with this issue is to regulate AI. AI is being irresponsibly developed and needs safeguards in place before we can continue to develop AI. Without control of the information being fed into AI systems, there can be no accurate and responsible way to effectively develop AI.

As someone who helped develop some of the Intelligence Community’s first AI tools, I know how to responsibly develop AI. Further to the resource issues, we must require transparent information relative to precisely what resources will be used, how they will be used, from where the energy and resources will come, and how any materials or resources used will be recycled as well as how they will be returned to the environment, or replaced.

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?

I believe in smart and responsible economic growth, but not at the cost to public utility customers. Data center developers must be required to pay their own grid, power, and water costs. Any new projects or ones under development need strict rules on how they use resources. This information needs to be made available to the public before any project proceeds. Also, whenever necessary, these projects should rely on clean energy sources to power their needs. Finally, the state needs to ensure oversight to ensure all state guidelines are met.

KEYWORDS: oversight, economic growth, rules clean energy

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?

We need to make sure our local communities have all the resources and tools they need to make decisions regarding data centers. In PA, development decisions are locally controlled, and they need to have strong legislation in place to make legally defendable decisions consistent with the desires of their communities.

I fully support intensive vetting of these projects, complete transparency on the part of the developer, and strong local legislation to help elected leaders make legally defendable decisions if those decisions are challenged in court.

KEYWORDS: Transparency, Legally Defendable, Local Control

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.

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.

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?

If I was in charge, I would give preferences to companies that use the most renewable energy and clean energy to support Their data center

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.

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?

There are currently some valuable house bills that have passed with bipartisan approval that have been set in a pile and forgotten by the Senate. Those bills would go a long way in starting the beginning of a long journey to regulate AI.

Ordinary ratepayers should not have to absorb any cost at all related to AI. This needs to be placed directly on the tech companies and profiting organizations that are jamming AI down on everyone without say or regulation. The US currently has more data centers than any other country and we have more than we need. The only way AI and those pushing the advancement of it at a rate of lightning need to be regulated to slow them down, and also held accountable for coming up with technology that does not destroy our environment or pass the cost on to ordinary ratepayers.

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?

Data centers are like the new factories, gobbling up power and water like there’s no tomorrow. Developers should pay their fair share so ordinary folks aren’t stuck footing the bill !! I’m all for transparency let’s know how much juice and water these places use before they break ground. And zoning rules should protect communities without turning every project into a bureaucratic nightmare.

Efficiency and sustainability, with a nod to organic stewardship, is the way to go.

KEYWORDS: fair costs, transparency, sustainable growth

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?

Pennsylvania should support economic development while protecting families, taxpayers, and communities. Local choice: Communities should have a meaningful say in data center projects. Developer pays: Developers should cover the costs they create—not taxpayers or ratepayers. Protect resources: Projects should meet clear standards for energy, water, environmental impact, and infrastructure. Transparency: Communities deserve clear information about a project’s impacts. Decommissioning: Developers should fund cleanup and restoration when facilities close. Responsible development means protecting Pennsylvania’s resources, respecting communities, and ensuring taxpayers are not left with the bill.

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 be self sufficient and not rely on the over burden grid. Data center should be a force multiplier for the area in which they support in jobs, energy, and revenue back into the community.

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?

I support HB2150. However, I do not support the development of AI data centers unless Environmental Impact Reports and Community Impact Reports are mandated, so policymakers, municipalities, and residents have a full understanding of how these facilities affect local communities and natural resources. Developers should be responsible for 100% of the costs associated with these impact studies, administered through the DEP.

If developers can demonstrate that negative impacts can be eliminated or fully mitigated, I support policies requiring them to fund the infrastructure for their own energy generation and broadband capacity, rather than relying on public systems.

The full costs of development should remain 100% the responsibility of the developer, and they should also be required to pay an annual fee or tax to offset any ongoing negative impacts and replenish the ecosystem, environment, and community.

I also support collecting a fee for potential hazards, and developing mandates that require the developer to pay for potential, future federal clean-ups.

Power: Renewable energy sources should be prioritized to keep AI data centers off the public grid as well as storage of renewable energies. Water: Recycling and the use of grey and black water should be required before any withdrawal from rivers, streams, wells, groundwater, or public water systems. Septic pumpers could transport their black water to these sites and they should be required to pay for the filtration of the water prior to use.

HB2150 also proposes a $10,000 per day penalty for non‑compliance, which I support.

KEYWORDS: Impact Studies, negative impacts, developer responsibility 100%, HB2150, penalties, renewable energy, recycling grey & black water

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?

While some Artificial Intelligence (AI) data is justified, most often in fields of mathematics and science, much is not. In fact, a large proportion of AI data generating creative writing and art either plagiarizes established works or renders the desired work too poorly. At the same time, AI-derived work is not properly and consistently labeled across a variety of platforms. Without such labeling, it becomes propaganda - tricking people into believing that images and quotes are true when they are not.

As a U.S. Representative, I would vote for the 3 year moratorium on the building of such data centers until they are truly justified and the products are clearly and consistently labeled as AI-derived. I anticipate that those built would then be far smaller than the current proposed ones. I would sponsor legislation that would mandate alternative forms of energy like wind, solar, and geo-thermal energy to be supplied by the AI data centers themselves, before allowing them to use natural gas, if located in the gas basin of Pennsylvania, or the small nuclear reactors whose technology has not been fully achieved.

Regarding water usage, I would sponsor legislation that would mandate the recycling of gray water in order not to reduce costs to local residents.

KEYWORDS: AI data centers

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?

The corporate efforts to exponentially grow data centers, whether used for AI or other purposes, are simply that: corporate, and profit-driven. Therefore, these projects should result in NO costs and minimal burdens to the public where they are being constructed.

I support legislation that requires full transparency of the projects and their reporting, with local municipalities being able to have a say in the process of development. Requirements for zero impacts to the local resources, such as the energy grid or available water resources, should be adhered to, and preference should be given to those companies willing and able to develop on properties with existing infrastructure (or brownfield sites), implementing and incorporating the use of renewable energy resources (such as geothermal energy) and/or bringing their own clean energy generation.

While I recognize the inevitability of increased data centers and the growth of AI, it is the job of legislators to ensure that the public is not adversely impacted by this growth, and it is my duty to ensure that future innovation is balanced with conservation.

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?

We must strike the right balance between protecting affordability for utility ratepayers and promoting environmentally conscious economic development and good-paying union jobs. Public reporting and transparency remains critical for public trust and understanding of the approval process. Other requirements and specifications should depend upon the particulars of a project, environmental factors, and that particular community’s input and energy needs.

KEYWORDS: Affordability ratepayers community

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?

Data centers use a tremendous amount of electricity and water resources. The developer should be required to pay for the entire cost of the increased use of electricity as well as all transmission and grid upgrades required for their projects. That cost should not be paid by ordinary ratepayers.

Additionally, water withdrawals for data centers should be strictly regulated by the Department of Environmental Protection to safeguard limited water resources. Full public reporting of a proposed data center is essential. Non-disclosure agreements between developers and municipalities should be prohibited to ensure transparency on a proposed data center so that the public can be fully informed.

KEYWORDS: Developer should pay costs

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?

I would ensure that the data center developers are responsible for all costs in developing and maintaining the center. they should also be responsible for all costs related to power this should not be passed to the public. This should be a transparent development and not one that makes promises to the community but does not follow through. Zoning rules should be in place that does not allow these centers to be placed community adjacent placing the water for the community at risk. I do not believe data centers should receive any type of tax relief or benefit from states for development.

KEYWORDS: Responsible, transparent, zoning

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 can bring jobs and tax base, but ordinary ratepayers and local communities should not be forced to subsidize their power demand, water use, or land-use impacts. If a project needs major new generation, transmission, distribution upgrades, backup systems, water infrastructure, or emergency-response capacity, the developer should pay those costs. The public benefit should come from good jobs, local tax revenue, enforceable community benefits, and infrastructure that communities actually want, not from backdoor subsidies or pressure on municipal zoning. I support the basic direction Pennsylvania has taken in requiring large-load customers to bear the costs they cause and in requiring more disclosure before projects move forward.

I would go a step further on land use. I support treating large AI data centers as a regional land-use issue, more like landfills or power plants than an ordinary warehouse. A municipality that hosts a project should have real control, but surrounding municipalities should also have a voice because the impacts do not stop at the property line. If a town wants a data center and neighboring communities can live with the traffic, noise, transmission buildout, water demand, and visual impact, that is one thing. If the host community or surrounding communities do not want it, the state should not steamroll them.

Before a project moves forward, I would support clear requirements on power, water, and public reporting. On power, the developer should show a binding energy plan proving that new demand will not raise bills for existing customers, and that it will pay for any grid upgrades, interconnection costs, and stranded-cost risk if the project scales down or walks away. On water, the developer should disclose expected annual consumption, source of supply, wastewater impacts, and water-use efficiency, and complete a feasibility study where local water stress is a concern. On transparency, I would require early notice to the host municipality and surrounding municipalities, public meetings before key site decisions are locked in, disclosure of the actual end user and project footprint, and ongoing annual reporting on energy use, water use, and community-benefit commitments. If a company wants fast-track treatment or public support, it should meet a very high bar on transparency and accountability first.

As of July 24, 2026, Pennsylvania already has several live proposals moving in this direction. House Bill 1834 passed the House on March 24, 2026 and would regulate commercial data centers with PUC review and cost-allocation rules. House Bill 2150 passed the House on April 13, 2026 and would require annual energy and water reporting. House Bill 2151 passed the House the same day and would create model zoning ordinance assistance for municipalities. The Governor’s May 27, 2026 GRID standards also require developers seeking Commonwealth support to build, bring, or buy incremental electric capacity, pay project-caused costs, report expected peak power and water use, and notify impacted local governments. That is a good start, but I would put even more weight on local consent and regional land-use control.

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?

I support a moratorium on data centers. They consume too many resources, and drive up energy prices in the Northeast.

Existing data centers should have to pass strict standards and ensure they are covering the costs to the communities around them. Technology and innovation are a great benefit to our state, but they must be considered with workers and the environment in mind.

KEYWORDS: Data Centers, AI, Energy

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?

I’m a conservationist. I have utility bills that are too high. Like so many people, I have serious concerns about the potential impact of data centers on our environment and energy costs. We need strong guardrails in place to protect our communities and our state’s beautiful natural resources.

I’ve been a strong advocate for House Bill 1834: Rep. Matzie’s Data Centers and Consumers bill. This omnibus set of strict guardrails would:

-Prevent data centers from passing energy costs onto ratepayers by mandating that they produce their own energy, increasingly from clean sources paired with battery storage -Insist that data centers make payments towards LIHEAP, our state’s low income energy assistance program -Prevents the costs of infrastructure upgrades required for data center construction from getting passed on to consumers.

Data centers must be held accountable to the public:I’m in favor of annual reporting standards for data centers that would disclose energy and water usage and compare those statistics to past years and projections.

Finally, I’m fully in favor of communities getting their say about data center proposals in their region—for that reason, I’ve introduced a data center zoning ordinance in my borough, where I serve as council president.

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?

As a member of the Consumer Protection and Utilities Committee, we have been working to address the issue of data center development in PA. During the budget season this year, the House passed numerous bills trying to slow down and protect residents from datacenter development until we can make informed decisions about how and if datacenter should be built. Unfortunately most of those proposals did not make it into the final budget product. I was happy to see Governor Shapiro take action by Executive Order to attempt to put guardrails on datacenter development. Many of the things in the Executive Order and things we have been working on legislatively, and will continue to do so through the rest of this term. While I recognize the importance of AI and the impact for good it is having in some areas of society, there has to be balance. Protecting the public health and safety of the people and protecting our natural water resources will always be at the forefront of my decision making on this issue.

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?

In their current technological development, I believe hyperscale data centers supporting AI and internet cloud computing represent an unmanageable environmental and financial threat to residents living within miles of these facilities. The environmental threat comes from the insatiable need of fresh water for cooling and sound and air pollution from the generation of electrical power over and above what the electrical network can deliver to the many acres of server racks. Similar to being too near to a nuclear power plant, the financial threat comes from a dramatic drop in real estate values anywhere near a hyperscale data center. For these and other numerous threats to the environment and real estate values my primary focus will be to support a 3-to-5-year moratorium on any further construction in Pennsylvania. It is my contention that technology is advancing so fast that the existing hyperscale data centers in Pennsylvania will be obsolete and abandoned within that time period leaving behind huge empty structures, unusable polluted land, and ruined real estate values where they now exist. Short of a moratorium, these structures need to be placed on sites that are not usable for any other purpose and well away from homes, agricultural land, and built-up areas. Equally important, the entire expense of constructing and operating a hyperscale data center, including all state and local taxes required of any other business, must be borne solely by the developer and operator and never the Pennsylvania taxpayer. One other note is that the state needs to stand ready to legally defend the zoning laws of county and township governments to prevent the use of predatory “lawfare” by developers and operators with deep financial pockets.

KEYWORDS: AI, moratorium, hyperscale data center

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?

Build the power first. Before a single block is laid for a large data center, developers should have the additional generation and grid infrastructure needed to serve it built, operating, and connected to the grid so the community benefits first. Then we can talk about the data center.

I build AI tools for a living. I understand the opportunity, but residents should not finance it through higher electric bills or reduced reliability. Developers should cover the added generation, transmission, and reliability costs their projects create, with enforceable financial commitments.

Before approval, I would also require a public water-use plan showing that the project will not compromise residents’ supply or shift infrastructure costs onto them. Power and water demand, tax incentives, and permanent job commitments should be disclosed publicly, with ongoing reporting and repayment provisions if subsidized promises fall short.

Meeting those conditions earns a proposal consideration. Local communities still deserve a meaningful say on location, noise, and whether the project belongs there.

KEYWORDS: Power first; Developer responsibility; Community benefit

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?

The amount of energy and water that these centers require should not affect ratepayers. Data Centers must absorb the costs as a part of doing business. Environmental concerns must be considered. I support a waiting period where these questions must be answered before the development is allowed.

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?

I do not support performative bills that make it look like Pennsylvania is doing something about data centers while still letting them move forward.

Telling us how much power and water a data center used after the fact does not protect us. By then, the project is already here. Moving some of the costs around does not solve the bigger problem either.

I support a three-year statewide moratorium on data centers. We need to stop this buildout before more projects are approved. We need time to understand the full impact on our water, power grid, electric bills, land, and communities.

I also support Senator Katie Muth’s proposal to stop data centers from becoming public utilities. Private data center companies should not be given special powers meant for utilities that serve the public. Until the state acts, our towns need the strongest local rules possible to protect themselves.

I am not looking for a way to make massive data centers work in Pennsylvania. I am fighting to protect our communities from them.

KEYWORDS: Three-Year Moratorium, Stop Data Center Expansion, Local Control

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?

Data centers can bring local investment and jobs, but those benefits can’t come at the expense of working families, local communities, or our environment. I believe that developers should be responsible for their own new utility generation so that taxpayers’ utility bills don’t skyrocket.

Before a project moves forward, I would support clear public reporting on projected electricity and water use, emissions, and any public subsidies involved. This would ensure transparency with these projects. Developers should also demonstrate how they will secure enough power without undermining reliability and affordability for existing customers.

KEYWORDS: Affordability, responsibility, regulation

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?

I think a governmental body, either at the state or national level, should set reasonable code restrictions to lessen the burden on local communities who are being approached by data center (DC) developers.

The most likely constraints in PA seem to be that the DCs must bring their own electricity, reuse the water used in cooling, and either meet noise and vibration requirements, or commit to build in previously developed industrial areas where the noise would not be more disruptive than what was approved for the previous occupant. I support these constraints.

Part of bringing their own power would be paying for the infrastructure to connect to the electrical grid.

The developers must commit their own capital and must not have a governmental backstop for their liabilities.

Some citizens are concerned about an apparent lack of transparency in municipal decision making around data centers. Banning data center developers from seeking non-disclosure agreements from municipal citizens or officers would help preserve transparency in government and reduce the likelihood of graft.

KEYWORDS: responsibility, transparency

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?

I believe that Data Centers have the potential to do either great harm or good for the communities they come into. We have seen communities be damaged by Data Centers where we have seen noise pollution, excessive water consumption, heating surrounding environments, bacterial blooms, and elevated electricity prices for the people sharing a grid with the data centers. It is crucial that if we want to have data centers come to PA and bring jobs, tax revenue, industrial opportunity, and financial incentives then we need to ensure that we have regulations in place that prevent bad outcomes for our communities and to empower citizens to hold these companies to account if they do not keep their promises.

I would support legislation such as HB 1834 which puts requirements in place for data center power generation, requirement for green energy usage, prevents them from raising energy costs for other people on the grid in our state, and requires their energy usage help fund state-level support programs for those in need. I would support legislation that would require all new data centers to be Gen 6 or higher, as these have nearly completely eliminated the issue of noise pollution. I would support legislation that ensures water is being recirculated and that there are methods of enforcement if the agreed to terms are not upheld. I believe that good state-level regulations create a floor from which local municipalities and counties can bargain from so that they are able to bring in the industry they want, while avoiding potential harms and from passing costs on to the wider region.

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?

If profits leave the state, there must been deep taxation to lessen the burden on PA taxpayers for roads, schools and public safety costs.

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?

I recognize that AI and the infrastructure supporting it are becoming an important part of our future. However, I do not believe Pennsylvania should pursue data center development at any cost. Economic growth should never come at the expense of our natural resources, farmland, or the people already living here.

Before any project moves forward, I support independent, science-based assessments of projected electricity demand, water consumption, environmental impacts, and effects on residential utility rates. Developers, not taxpayers or ratepayers, should bear the costs of infrastructure needed to support their projects.

Pennsylvania’s farmland, forests, waterways, and ecosystems are not renewable on a human timeline. Once they’re gone, they’re gone. With freshwater supplies becoming an increasing concern worldwide, we also have a responsibility to carefully evaluate whether large-scale water consumption is sustainable for future generations.

Innovation and conservation are not mutually exclusive. We should welcome responsible development, but only when it protects our communities, respects local zoning decisions, and leaves Pennsylvania’s land and water better, not worse, for the next generation.

KEYWORDS: Sustainable Development, Environmental Stewardship, Infrastructure Accountability

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?

I believe that the entire cost of a large-scale data center should be paid for by the developers and that the public should benefit in accordance with the effects that the data center will have on the community. I would support all power being produced by the developer and that the energy must renewable. In addition, all water used should come from reclaimed sources.

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?

Developers should pay their own way. If a data center needs new power plants, transmission lines, or water systems, those costs belong to the company, not to families already stretched by electric bills. I support the effort to move those costs off ordinary ratepayers, and I’d want it written into law. The public should get real, lasting benefits in return, not promises that fade once the project is built.

Before a project moves forward, I’d support clear requirements: an honest, independent look at how much power and water it will use and who pays for it, protection for local water supplies and open space, and public reporting on energy and water use once it’s running. Communities should also have a real voice, with public hearings and local control over zoning, because the rights of the people who live there must be protected.

Technology is going to keep growing. My job is to make sure growth doesn’t come at the expense of our neighbors, our water, or our wallets.

KEYWORDS: Data Centers, Ratepayer Protection, Transparency

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?

This is the “new fracking.” We must learn from our failures to address the serious environmental impacts of AI data centers.

I am co-sponsoring HB 2150 and 2151, which would require data center developers and users to report their operations and energy and water usage to PA, and direct municipalities to regulate data centers and adopt local ordinances to limit harmful impacts on nearby communities. We need guardrails as this new technological frontier expands rapidly.

I do not support letting these companies come in and reap economic benefits by destroying our environment and harming our communities, and will continue to advocate for more laws tackling AI-related issues and fighting for affordable energy for Pennsylvanians.

KEYWORDS: guardrails, protection, 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?

The developers benefit so the developers should pay for it up front. The public bears the burden so the least that can be done is to ensure the communities aren’t having their air and water polluted.

KEYWORDS: Developers, communities, polluted.

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?

Unregulated and unchecked data centers will be incredibly dangerous to the health and wellbeing of our communities. That’s why I supported House Bill 1834, which establishes important guardrails to ensure the rapid growth of data centers doesn’t drive up electricity costs for Pennsylvania families or compromise our clean energy future. The bill requires large data centers to cover the costs they create, strengthens oversight of their impact on our electric grid, and promotes the development of new, clean in-state energy resources rather than shifting those costs onto our residents.

I also believe strong environmental protections and transparency are essential before these projects move forward. Developers should clearly report projected electricity and water use, evaluate impacts on local infrastructure and natural resources, and work with state and local officials to ensure these facilities do not strain our electric grid or threaten our environment.

We have a responsibility to protect our communities, safeguard our air and water, and ensure economic growth benefits all Pennsylvanians, not just private developers.

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?

There will be no Data Center project that I will ever support. The only data center I will ever support is the Free Library of Philadelphia.

I am ecstatic to support libraries and tech centers across the United States. Human ingenuity is an endless, unquantifiable resource we must invest ourselves in.

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?

I have no understanding of the reported need for the number of hyper data centers that are reportedly under consideration. I am concerned about AI uses for Flock cameras and the data that was essentially stolen from public databases during DOGE’s tenure. The potential for misuse seems extreme! That said, it seems there is some legitimate need for data centers.

1. Electric demand / grid infrastructure: Require data centers to pay for electrical grid upgrades that they require to support new grid electrical demand. It is unfair for individual rate-payers to bear the costs of these upgrades.

2. Acoustic / noise pollution: Any gas-fired OR diesel generators should be required to use best available technology to reduce ambient noise with substantial acoustic shielding protecting persons, livestock and wildlife within a large radius. I do not know what that radius is; much study is needed to understand some reported negative effects on pollinators and livestock. Alongside these concerns, it would be prudent to locate data centers away from all residential areas, including schools, churches and daycare centers.

3. Water Usage: Water use for cooling servers should be closed loop to the greatest possible extent with no evaporative cooling used unless sited on a substantial surface water source such as the Susquehanna or Lake Erie. Drawing sub-surface water should be limited to potable water usage for staff use only - drinking and sanitary needs. There should be no risk to aquifer depletion from data centers.

4. Light pollution: Data centers should employ dark sky compatible lighting with light trespass less than one foot-candle at all property boundaries.

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?

The expansion of large-scale data centers offers economic potential, but Pennsylvania must prioritize ratepayer protection, community health, and high-quality jobs. In alignment with the AFL-CIO mission, I support shifting all infrastructure, generation, and grid-reliability costs entirely onto developers via Project Labor Agreements (PLAs), ensuring this digital infrastructure is built and maintained by highly skilled, unionized local labor without burdening ordinary ratepayers.

To protect public health and local ecosystems, we should replicate the success of Pennsylvania townships that have enacted strict municipal restrictions. I support mandatory zoning guidance, strict power usage effectiveness (PUE) caps, and closed-loop water cooling mandates to prevent the depletion and thermal pollution of local watersheds. Furthermore, comprehensive environmental and grid-impact reporting must be publicly disclosed before any project approval.

By enforcing strict transparency, utility oversight, and resource restrictions, we can prevent data centers from straining our electrical grid or compromising community health. This balanced approach ensures tech developers pay their fair share, local natural resources are legally protected, and the economic benefits of technological innovation directly support working families.

KEYWORDS: Ratepayer-protection, Township-zoning-restrictions, union-labor-infrastructure-data centers

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?

Data centers are needed to power our technology economy. But we must require data centers to either provide or pay for the electricity they use, adhere to state environmental and water conservation standards, follow local noise and lighting ordinances, and be open in dealing with local governments and the public.

Data centers will provide good jobs, during construction and operation, and significant local and state tax revenue to pay for important services. Data centers must become part of our communities, not overrun our communities.

KEYWORDS: communities, open, revenue

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?

As a candidate who puts the people of the 112th District first, I believe the costs that these projects create should be paid by the developers who profit from them, while genuine public benefits are welcomed under clear, enforceable rules. Ratepayers should not subsidize hyperscale facilities. If a substation, transmission line, or capacity expansion would not be needed “but for” the data center, those costs belong on the developer’s ledger—not on seniors, working families, or small businesses. Public benefits such as property tax revenue, construction jobs, and long-term employment are real and should be maximized through local agreements, but they do not justify shifting infrastructure costs onto the rest of us or placing industrial-scale facilities in residential areas.

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?

I’m a strong proponent of Rep. Matzie’s HB 1834 and Governor Shapiro’s latest Executive Order; we cannot allow power-hungry data centers to take advantage of our community. I believe data centers should pay for their own construction costs as well as any upgrades required to maintain our power grid while they do business in our state. I support Rep. Matzie’s bill requiring a percentage of their power to be generated from renewables and would support future policy to increase this percentage. While the state works to build out its renewable portfolio, megacorporations cannot be let off the hook. It’s vital that data centers be directly beholden to their community, and I will work to maintain heightened regulations and reporting around data centers to ensure the community understands the full toll on our water, power, air, and noise levels. Only then can our citizens be fully informed on accepting and rejecting data center proposals.

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?

Developers should pay for the cost of power grid upgrades, or be able to provide their own power on site. We can tackle two issues at once and stipulate that they must be in the form of new sources of renewable energy. Once the new sources of capacity and generation are complete and the grid is reliable, we can work to shift some of the cost onto the public for maintenance of the systems over time. If these developers were not looking to build such massive structures, we would not need to upgrade our grid so much in terms of generation and capacity.

Water use is another issue that I don’t believe can be solved realistically. Closed loop cooling systems might work on some of the smaller scale centers, but those that plan on using more power than a small city could not reasonably do so, without some source of water nearby.

I support requiring developers to report monthly water and electricity use as well as effects to local habitats. If attached to the public power grid, it should be the expectation that these data centers would be the first ones to reduce power/and or water use, rather than the public, in the event the capacity is not enough to handle the demand at a given time.

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?

In Pennsylvania, Governor Josh Shapario has set up some guard rails for data center development and I currently support his plan. The Governor’s Responsible Infrastructure Development (GRID) standards establish best practices that data Centers must comply with to receive support from the Commonwealth. These standards are the benchmark for data center developers to demonstrate that they are doing right by Pennsylvania communities.

They focus on four key areas: Energy Affordability, Transparency and Community Engagement, Workforce and economic development and Environmental Protection. Data centers need to generate their own energy, preferable from renewable sources and provide evidence of community benefits, like job opportunities. They need to provide information about their water consumption and any chemicals added to their water, and finally if that water with any chemicals or pollutants in it will be emptied into the ground, or watershed.

Annual reports on energy, water, fire safety, community benefits must be available to the public.

KEYWORDS: GRID, Renewable energy, Data Centers, Artificail Intelligence,

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?

I’m opposed to new data centers - they present dangers to our air and water, they drive up power costs, and their developers consistently fail basic transparency tests.

Where they’re already in development, we ought to demand: 1. that all associated labor be union labor; 2. that all costs associated with new power infrastructure and increased rates associated with their grid demand be borne by the developer or operator, not by residential consumers 3. that all costs associated with environmental restoration be borne by the developer or operator, not by residential consumers; 4. a transparent community benefit agreement.

I’m signed on to multiple pieces of legislation that would hold these data center developers accountable and give communities more agency.

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.

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 represent both economic opportunities and significant infrastructure challenges, and Pennsylvania should approach their development thoughtfully. I believe we must carefully consider the potential health, environmental, energy, and resource impacts of these facilities, in addition to the financial costs. Companies that benefit from these projects should bear an appropriate share of the costs associated with the demands they place on our infrastructure, and those costs should not unfairly fall on ordinary ratepayers or taxpayers.

I am a strong believer in local government authority when it comes to data center development. Local elected officials are responsible for zoning and land use decisions, and they should have a meaningful voice in determining whether and how these projects move forward in their communities. Those closest to the residents impacted by development are often best positioned to understand local needs and concerns.

At the same time, the state has an important role in establishing standards around energy and water usage, environmental protections, and transparency requirements. I support strong public reporting and oversight to ensure developers are accountable for their impacts. Pennsylvania should encourage responsible innovation while protecting our communities, natural resources, and long-term quality of life.

KEYWORDS: Local Control; Strong Regulations; Environmental Protection

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?

I do not believe the public should have to subsidize the building of data centers. I see no long term benefits for our communities that would justify imposing the cost of data center building and operations on the public. They are private corporations and should pay their own bills.

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?

Out-of-state tech corporations should never be allowed to steamroll local communities, hurt our environment, and drive up bills for working families. As legislators, our job is to empower municipalities to make demands that match their unique needs and reject projects if they aren’t a good fit.

All of my ideas on this issue are rooted in respect for and power of the community. First of all, facilities need to bring their own water and power so local utilities and resources are not impacted. Developers should cover 100% of their grid upgrades and capacity costs. Entities like PUC should keep watch during construction and operation to make sure there aren’t costs put onto residents.

Developers should sign legally binding community benefit agreements, negotiated with residents, that invest directly in local schools, road repairs, and emergency services. Developers should also implement plans to limit construction traffic and control other noise pollution.

Most of all, companies that do get approved need to publicly and continuously report their energy consumption, water usage, and environmental impact transparently so that communities can decide at any point if the facility is not meeting standards and should be shut down. If a data center wants to build in Pennsylvania, they must pay their own way, bring their own resources, and earn the consent of the people who live here.

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?

Data center developers (not ordinary ratepayers) should pay the full costs of new power generation, transmission, water infrastructure, and grid upgrades required by their projects. Before approval, developers should disclose projected energy and water use, demonstrate access to reliable clean power, meet strong efficiency and water-conservation standards, and provide enforceable community benefits.

Public subsidies should be limited and tied to clear job, environmental, and consumer protections.

KEYWORDS: Developer responsibility, clean energy, public transparency

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?

I absolutely support strong regulations on data centers as I have heard from voters again and again that they are not interested in the widespread construction of these buildings while their corporate owners reap tax benefits and pass on electricity costs to regular working families. This is no longer even a debate - the people have spoken and I will carry out the will of the people in Harrisburg.

I will protect the rights of municipalities to use local zoning for noise control, aesthetics, and community fit - no one should be left out of a decision on what is built in their own backyard.

I support state-level regulations, such as HB 1834 and Governor Shapiro’s GRID plan to ensure data centers pay for their own infrastructure and grid upgrades, preventing them from shifting those costs onto your monthly electric and water bills.

KEYWORDS: GRID, electric bills

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?

Pennsylvania ratepayers are currently subsidizing data center growth in Virginia through the structure of PJM, the regional grid operator. Because of how transmission and capacity costs are allocated across the PJM footprint, Pennsylvania families are helping pay for the massive electricity infrastructure and “super grid” needed to power data centers in Virginia — the data center capital of the world.

Many of these facilities have deep connections to federal government contracts, meaning Pennsylvania households are effectively being taxed to support out-of-state infrastructure. We need to reform PJM’s cost allocation rules so that large data centers and the entities driving explosive new demand pay their full share of costs, rather than shifting them onto Pennsylvania ratepayers. Any data centers built in Pennsylvania should also be required to cover their complete infrastructure, power, and water costs upfront, with strong transparency and local oversight.

KEYWORDS: PJM reform, ratepayer protection, data center costs

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?

The State needs to provide over arching policy, like bring your own energy. Then it should be left to the local municipalities to decide on a case by case basis. We want these center in our Country and not in China. Let build them responsibly without chasing them away. Lets build then on marginal land and not on good farmland.

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 an elected official, I’ll promote and support hybrid energy solutions. I see space for various energy sources including renewable energy in PA. This includes support for HB’s 2277 and 2275, resulting in rebates for PA electricity users, creating an estimated 15,000 energy jobs, and smart investments in clean, reliable energy. More current data provided by EIA indicates that PA is now 3rd in the U.S. in terms of energy production behind TX and NM. But, we have yet to realize our future energy production capacity by including renewable energy sources. This could include expediting approvals for hybrid energy production, repurposing no longer used fossil fuel locations, maximizing grants, etc.

KEYWORDS: Hybrid energy, renewable energy, fossil fuels, HB 2277, HB 2275, rebates, jobs, investments, repurpose, grants

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?

The first thing that PA needs is a modern, robust electrical grid and then we need to build out our green energy initiatives to include solar highways.

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?

There are clear environmental benefits to implementing more wind, solar, and hydropower energy production. However, at the same time fossil fuel and nuclear energy production supports thousands of jobs in our state. Finally, we need to set goals for more clean energy in Pennsylvania as well as funding to modernize our power grid to support these new sources.

KEYWORDS: modernize, jobs, clean energy, power grid

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?

I believe we need to expand our use of green energy and fully integrate it into the electrical grid. We will never be able to meaningfully reduce our dependence on fossil fuels if we don’t invest in green infrastructure and prove it can help offset the need for fossil fuels.

As a member of the House Blue-Green Caucus I have supported geothermal and Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), Clean Manufacturing, Battery Storage and Solar Warehouses, Solar for Warehouses and Solar for Schools. In addition, I support House Bill 503 – Pennsylvania Climate Emissions Reduction Program.

KEYWORDS: Green energy, Expand, Integrate

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.

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.

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?

I have worked with rural Electric the owner of one of the Hydro plants that we have in Pennsylvania to hopefully identify a location where we could possibly do another Hydro plant in Pennsylvania that is still in the works. I’ve also voted for and sponsored bills that will increase access to Solar energy and community Solar.

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.

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?

PA needs to strive for being in the top 10 in the country for cleaner energy productions. Fossil fuel needs to be transitioned into cleaner sources. In order to do that dark and corporate money needs to be removed from politics, because PA is largely bought and paid for by dark and corporate money sources.

Many of those sources have vested interests in PA’s fossil fuel industry. The fossil fuel industry in PA needs to have the same rules and regulations implemented on it, that many of the current politicians are trying to force on cleaner energy source in order to slow them down or even stop them from being viable energy source options. There are at least 4 HBs that outline a plan for incorporating cleaner energy sources in PA that would help with addressing energy distribution.

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’s got natural gas and nuclear energy in its corner, and that’s a solid foundation. But we can’t ignore renewables like wind and solar — they’re the new kids on the block with a lot to offer. I support letting the market decide how fast renewables grow, with incentives for organic and sustainable energy solutions that fit the MAHA philosophy.

No heavy mandates, just smart policies that keep energy affordable, reliable, and clean enough to make Mother Nature smile.

KEYWORDS: Energy balance, market-driven, sustainable

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 pursue an all-of-the-above energy strategy that builds on our strengths in natural gas, nuclear power, and emerging technologies. We should remove unnecessary regulations and bureaucratic barriers that drive up costs while maintaining strong safety and environmental standards. As a State Representative, I will support responsible deregulation, faster permitting, and greater competition to increase energy production, lower costs, and support Pennsylvania workers and businesses.

Taxpayers also deserve accountability. We should regularly review government spending and regulations to eliminate waste and reduce the cost of living and doing business in Pennsylvania.

Pennsylvania has the resources to be an energy leader. We need to produce more, regulate smarter, and keep energy affordable.

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?

I am a firm believer in the current energy systems and we should be producing even more to reduce the cost of utilities for all Pennsylvanians. These proven energy methods can be reinforced with alternative energy sources. I would support increasing hydropower, but solar and wind are not as reliable or as energy producing as the previously mentioned.

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?

I support accelerating renewable energy sources and storage where the grid can actually use them, by modernizing siting rules with community benefit agreements / requirements. I support interconnection reform to fast track projects that relieve known PJM congestion areas in PA, as well as transparent interconnection timelines and fees for mid-scale solar and storage and targeted incentives for projects that pair renewables with grid storage.

By setting clear targets for emissions, reliability metrics, and portfolio shares that require utilities and PJM to show how their plans align.

KEYWORDS: Accelerate renewable energy, grid storage, targets, metrics, portfolio shares

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?

I would support federal legislation that would mandate sourcing our energy from wind, solar, hydropower, and geothermal sources, possibly boosted by federal funding to help customers as these sources of energy are more expensive at this time. With mandated sourcing, production of these alternative forms of energy would be encouraged to explore efficiencies and consistencies of output.

KEYWORDS: wind, solar, and hydropower energy production

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?

I would re-introduce incentives for residents and businesses to install and adopt alternative energy sources in our state. I would commit to doing whatever possible within my power to fully support the statewide implementation of projects aimed at developing renewable energy sources, ranging from geothermal energy to wind and solar farms and everything in between.

We simply cannot continue to be fully reliant on fossil fuels, whether as a result of the obvious environmental impacts, or the fickle nature of its availability (and therefore its potential to cripple the world’s economy, as we’ve witnessed with the unnecessary war in Iran). Nuclear energy can be further developed, but the inherent risks it carries simply do not exist with renewable energy sources that can also be developed. Our new generation of a workforce should be aimed at development of a re-envisioned energy future rather than that of a tired and troubled past one.

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?

The key to this expanding the energy deployment of renewable energy resources is to expand the transmission capabilities of the grid to allow more renewable energy to participate in the distribution on an equal basis with fossil fuels. Once transmission expansion occurs, ensuring that the renewables have access to capital investment and a fair tax base is crucial.

KEYWORDS: Renewable transmission deployment

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?

We need to accelerate the expansion of renewable energy resources to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels that contribute to climate change. Wind, solar, geothermal, hydropower, battery storage capacity, and the promoting of the solar for schools program as well as legislation to establish community solar initiatives can all have a positive influence in achieving these goals.

I co-sponsored House Bill 501 to expand the use of clean energy standards to provide for a minimum of 35% generation from renewable energy sources by 2035.

KEYWORDS: Expand renewable energy

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?

It is vital that we as a state support and encourage use of wind, solar and hydropower energy. Renewable energy sources is the method to battle climate change and move toward the future. I believe that tax credits for the use of renewable energy sources may be a way to increase its use. Education to inform and encourage these methods can be one way to further the use.

KEYWORDS: Support, educate, Renewable

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 have a more balanced energy portfolio than it does today. Right now, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, Pennsylvania’s electric power sector is still dominated by natural gas at 51.4% and nuclear at 39.2%, with coal at 7.4% and renewables at just 2.0% in 2024. That tells me we need to keep a diverse and reliable system, but also do a much better job growing renewables, storage, and efficiency instead of staying near the bottom of the country on wind, solar, and hydropower.

My view is that nuclear should remain a major backbone source because it provides steady carbon-free power. I understand why people have concerns about nuclear power. I grew up right next to Three Mile Island, so I do not dismiss those concerns. But I also think we have to be honest about relative risk. Newer, smaller, more efficient reactor designs are not the same as older generations of nuclear plants, and the risks of modern nuclear technology are lower than the long-term public-health and environmental damage we have accepted for decades from coal. Natural gas will remain part of the mix in the near term, but it should not be an excuse to delay cleaner energy or ignore methane leakage. Coal should continue to decline.

The biggest area for growth should be renewables, battery storage, grid upgrades, and efficiency, especially where they can directly lower costs for working families and local governments. One policy I strongly support is expanding state support for schools to install solar power. School taxes are a real burden for many Pennsylvanians, especially seniors on fixed incomes who already own their homes and are getting squeezed by rising costs. If we can help school districts replace one of their major long-term operating costs with renewable energy, that is a win-win: lower utility costs for schools, less pressure on local property taxes, and more clean energy on the grid. I would also support modernizing Pennsylvania’s energy standards, speeding up interconnection for viable projects, expanding community energy and distributed generation, and strengthening efficiency programs that lower bills before families use a kilowatt.

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?

Climate change is an existential issue. We need to have an all of the above energy approach and take advantage of renewable energy sources.

I would incentivize these energy sources and ensure there are better plans in place for our state to move to renewable energies in the future. Pennsylvania can and should be a leader environmentally, not lagging behind.

KEYWORDS: Climate Change, Energy, Solar

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?

On the campaign trail, I’m always talking up the potential that diversifying our energy portfolio—and getting more energy onto the grid—has to reduce utility costs for consumers. That’s not even to mention the positive effect that increasing our supply of clean energy would have on air quality, public health, and mitigating climate change.

In office, I’d support policies like Governor Shapiro’s Lightning Plan to fast track our state’s transition to clean energy, and be a strong advocate for increasing the share of clean energy in our energy portfolio. I’d also support policies to incentivize the construction of solar panels and other clean energy technologies here in our commonwealth to create good union manufacturing jobs and ensure that Pennsylvania remains the leader in energy production that it’s been since the Industrial Revolution.

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?

While recognizing PA’s various energy sources and the realities we face with meeting the needs to keep the PJM grid meeting the needs of consumers, we also need to address the affordability issues that face the ratepayers. To do this, we need to expand to all forms of energy including more renewable energy sources. The major impediment to this is the cap on our Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards (AEPS). This cap has been in place for decades and it needs to be expanded. I am also part of a working group of multi-state legislators working to change PJM’s distribution and rates to protect consumers and be open to more alternative energy sources.

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?

I would not want to significantly change Pennsylvania state fossil-fuel and nuclear energy production portfolio seeking to minimize financial impacts on Pennsylvania energy rate payers. In most cases, I would oppose state investment and tax credit sweetheart deals for expansion of fossil-fuel and nuclear power plants in Pennsylvania. At the same time, I would support investment in academic studies and experiments in advanced safe self-fueling fission and fusion nuclear power systems in the hope that in the future they could replace all fossil-fuel power generation in Pennsylvania. Where I would strongly support the use of state assistance and tax credit incentives is for energy production is in wind, solar, and, to a limited degree, hydropower. While wind and hydropower have some maintenance cost associated with them, solar arrays, once they are installed, require minimal maintenance. While prohibiting installation of solar arrays on agricultural land or in recreational areas, I particularly want to incentivize installations on the vast roofs of warehouses or other buildings with expansive roofs, over parking lots, and, perhaps, even over Interstate and state highways. I believe dramatically expanding solar energy inputs into the power grid could significantly reduce the cost of electrical power for Pennsylvania rate payers. One other energy policy I would like to pursue is incentivizing the replacement of huge ugly overhead high-voltage power lines and rights-of-way seized from property owners and farmers with lines running underground along roadways. The state already owns the rights of way along roadways avoiding the need to implement eminent domain seizers on any luckless property owners in the powerline path.

KEYWORDS: renewable energy advantage

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?

I support an all-of-the-above strategy that significantly grows Pennsylvania’s energy production. We do not need to lead the country in every individual source to be the overall energy leader.

Natural gas, nuclear, coal, wind, solar, and hydropower should all have a place. I would judge projects by whether they deliver dependable, affordable power, meet environmental standards, and make economic sense. I would not set an arbitrary percentage for each source.

I support clear permitting deadlines, investment in transmission, upgrades to existing plants, and opportunities for new generation, including advanced nuclear. We also need to make it easier to connect viable projects to the grid while giving host communities a meaningful voice.

The goal is more available power, lower costs for families and employers, and enough capacity to attract new businesses without sacrificing reliability.

KEYWORDS: Energy abundance; Affordability; Grid reliability

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?

It is obvious that we need to increase our clean energy portfolio. Solar is by far the most economical method of enenrgy production but the natural gas lobby is a formidable power here. We have been working with the PUC and PJM on getting more clean energy to our grid. We introduced legislation to require that GETs (Grid Enhancement Technology) is considered before any new power production is brought on line. Obviously, Data Centers are making all of this even more complicated. One thing we seem to agree on is that rate payers should not be shouldering the additional costs.

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 is one of the biggest energy-producing states in the country. Yet families here keep opening electric bills they can barely afford. Something is wrong with that picture.

I believe we need a mix of energy. Natural gas, nuclear, and coal are part of Pennsylvania and support thousands of jobs. We should also grow solar, wind, and other cleaner energy. We do not need to pick one and shut everything else down.

What I care about most is how these choices affect the people who live here. Working families should not be paying higher bills while big energy companies get tax breaks and special deals. I support making more of our energy here, improving our power grid, and growing new energy sources when they make sense for our communities. I will also fight to make sure the cost is not dumped on families.

Pennsylvania has powered this country for generations. Our workers and communities have paid a price for it, too. They should be the ones who benefit from what we produce here.

KEYWORDS: Lower Utility Bills, Pennsylvania Jobs, Energy Independence

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?

I believe we need a diverse energy portfolio that protects reliability and affordability while moving toward a cleaner future. Natural gas and nuclear energy currently play major roles in our grid, and nuclear in particular provides reliable carbon-free power. But we’ve fallen behind in wind and solar generation even as those technologies become more affordable and faster to deploy.

Natural gas should remain part of the transition, but we can’t rely on it forever or allow coal to keep being a long-term centerpiece of our energy strategy.

I support strengthening and expanding solar energy so more families and businesses can benefit from clean energy. We should invest in battery storage and modernizing our grid so renewable power can be used more reliably. For example, data centers should help pay for the generation and infrastructure they require instead of shifting those costs onto families and small businesses.

KEYWORDS: Solar, wind, responsibility

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?

Appropriate energy diversification comes down to having reliable power at a reasonable price when you need it
When I worked at PG&E, we ran simulations using a dispatching model to identify the generation mix that best suited the demand profile over time and kept reliability high and prices as low as possible. Generally speaking, wind and solar do not provide power at a high enough rate of availability to deserve a subsidized position in the power portfolio. Both create waste disposal problems at end of their useful lives that are often overlooked by their supporters. Solar panels installed in the US also sit at the end of a supply chain that starts in China. I do not think we should be dependent on China for domestic US power production. Hydropower is highly reliable and creates no exhaust which makes it more attractive to me than the other two you mentioned, but it is disfavored by many ecologists because of its effects on the fish populations, which makes it difficult to site. Externalities matter for so-called green sources as well as for more conventional power production.

KEYWORDS: reliability, externalities, dependence

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?

I am a huge supporter of wind and solar energy. I myself installed a solar array that completely powers my house. We have 2 large wind farms near us, the Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm and the Sand Ridge Wind Farm, both of which generate huge amounts of power for our grid. Unfortunately, there is a persistent misunderstanding that the energy being generated here on our mountains is being sent to other places and is not benefitting the people of our communities here.

I believe leaning into renewable energy sources is essential, not just because of the environmental impact, but also for geopolitical stability and energy independence. I believe that if we lean into renewable energy, and then actually educate the public and ensure that people are aware of the benefits they are receiving from them then we could change our energy trajectory for the better.

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?

We must close the door on new fossil fuel industries and incentivize renewable energy. Small scales green energy, grant systems to encourage green energy industries, including reducing dependence on petroleum based products is the right direction for PA

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 has been an energy leader for generations, and I believe we can continue to be one by embracing an “all-of-the-above” approach. Natural gas, nuclear, coal, renewables, and emerging technologies all have a role to play as we work toward affordable, reliable, and cleaner energy.

I don’t believe we should force one industry out in favor of another. Instead, we should invest in innovation, modernize our electric grid, encourage responsible development of renewable energy where it makes sense, and support technologies that reduce emissions while protecting good-paying Pennsylvania jobs.

Energy policy should balance environmental stewardship with economic reality. Families need affordable utility bills, businesses need reliable power, and workers deserve confidence that they’re not being left behind during technological change.

Pennsylvania has the opportunity to lead by diversifying our energy portfolio, strengthening grid resilience, and creating the next generation of skilled energy jobs right here at home.

KEYWORDS: Energy Diversity, Grid Reliability, Innovation

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?

I believe that renewable, clean energy should be increasingly adopted and take up an expanding portion of PA’s energy production portfolio.

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 has powered this country for generations, and I’m grateful to the workers and families behind that. But we can’t rely only on fossil fuels, and ranking 45th in wind, solar, and hydropower tells me we’re leaving opportunity on the table. I want a more balanced mix, with much more solar, wind, and hydropower, and a serious look at the next generation of nuclear energy. It’s clean and reliable, and Pennsylvania has the expertise. (My son is studying nuclear engineering, so I hear how much the field is changing.) Any path forward must put safety, waste storage, and local voices first. Our Constitution guarantees clean air and pure water, and that promise should guide these choices.

I’d restore access to solar for families hit by recent federal cuts, and protect a homeowner’s right to use solar power. I’d support HB 109 to identify communities facing the most pollution, and make better use of the grid we already have to lower electric bills. Rising demand from data centers shouldn’t land on ratepayers, so I’d support regulating them, with development decisions staying close to local communities.

KEYWORDS: Renewable Energy, Affordability, Clean Air and Water

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?

Green energy is the future and those standing in the way are endangering our children and grandchildren. Everyone has a right to clean air and pure water. I take these protections seriously as they directly impact us economically, as well as our overall health.Unchecked development without storm water mitigation in years past left us with flooding issues.

I co-sponsored HB 1260 to expand solar energy. I believe that a natural gas extraction fee is long overdue. Investing in energy-efficient, alternative fuel sources drives innovation and creates sustainable, green jobs.

When we fail our environment, we fail ourselves.

KEYWORDS: green, climate, jobs

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?

We should strive to gather and use as much renewable energy as possible. I am doing my best, even while not elected to office, to get solar power for a local recycling plant. They only need $90,000 and it’s a one-time investment. Won’t even need maintenance for 25 years or so.

I would support any grant or policy that reduces our dependence on fossil fuels.

KEYWORDS: Renewable, investment, dependence.

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 has an opportunity to become a national leader in clean energy, but we need to seize it. While natural gas and nuclear power continue to play a role in meeting our current energy needs, we have fallen behind in developing wind, solar, and other renewable energy sources. Expanding clean energy generation will diversify our energy portfolio, strengthen our electric grid, improve energy security, lower long-term energy costs, reduce emissions, and create thousands of good-paying union jobs across the Commonwealth.

That’s why I have supported legislation to modernize Pennsylvania’s energy standards, expand community energy projects, and incentivize new renewable energy generation and energy storage. These investments will help bring more affordable energy online, attract private investment, and ensure Pennsylvania remains competitive in the growing clean energy economy while building a more reliable and resilient energy future.

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?

We should prioritize the development of these energy production resources across cities and areas of land suited for such industrial purposes. I would support consumer credits to switch to green energy across every electronic asset that consumes traditional fuels.

I would also support massive, historic investments in rail services, their expansion, improvement and enhanced aesthetics and maintenance. We have the capital to perform these wonders, and should give it to the people so they can create these incredibly important projects. Green jobs are the future we need.

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?

I was supportive of federal tax credits for solar and wind power installation before the current federal administration suspended these programs. I believe they should be re-instated. I understand that solar is not the low-cost producer of incremental electrical capacity in PA. Based on this, I would like to see our state energy portfolio prioritized in this order, top to bottom: solar, natural gas, geothermal, nuclear, wind, oil and coal.

It is likely that all feasible hydro plants are already operational - unless there are economic low-head hydro options to be employed in the Susquehanna watershed. I do not favor using eminent domain to displace agricultural / residential use as has been proposed at Cuff’s Run on the Susquehanna.

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’s energy strategy must balance our historical strength as a top natural gas and nuclear producer with our 45th-place ranking in renewables. In line with the mission of the AFL-CIO, our energy transition must be worker-centered, family-sustaining, and focused on economic justice.

I support updating the Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards (AEPS) to aggressively scale up wind, solar, and hydropower production. However, this expansion must incorporate strict prevailing wage requirements and Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) to ensure that new clean energy infrastructure is built by highly skilled, unionized Pennsylvania workers.

Furthermore, we cannot leave traditional energy communities behind. I advocate for policies that invest state resources into a “just transition”—including dedicated union apprenticeship pathways and retraining programs that bridge displaced fossil-fuel workers directly into high-paying clean energy and grid-modernization jobs. By protecting existing baseload nuclear and gas strengths while mandating strong labor standards for renewable expansion, Pennsylvania can modernize its electrical grid, lower consumer costs, and lead the nation in a clean energy economy built by union labor.

KEYWORDS: Clean energy project labor agreements, just-transition, grid modernization

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?

We should return to incrementally increasing the amount of energy generated by renewable sources under the Pennsylvania Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard. To meet our growing electricity needs, we must use natural gas, nuclear, wind, solar and hydro.

Natural gas does contribute to climate change, but less so than coal, and provides economic benefits throughout Pennsylvania and helps hold down energy costs, as we increase energy produced by renewable sources.

KEYWODS: AEPS, renewable, economic

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?

We rank near the top in natural gas, nuclear, and coal production for a reason: these sources deliver reliable, affordable power that supports manufacturing, keeps family energy bills in check, and creates good-paying jobs across the Commonwealth. Ranking near the bottom in wind, solar, and hydro does not mean we should force a radical shift that raises costs or threatens grid reliability. Wind, solar, and hydro as complementary, not primary: These sources can play a growing role where they make economic sense and can be integrated without undermining reliability. Intermittent generation requires backup and transmission investments; we should not pretend it can replace dispatchable power overnight. Pennsylvania’s geography and weather limit their potential relative to states with stronger wind or solar resources.

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?

Renewable energy doesn’t just help keep our planet green, it lowers grid utilization and cuts utility costs for everyone across the state. It’s a win-win and the next step in making Pennsylvania better for the next generation. Not only should industries be incentivized to implement renewable energies to offset carbon emissions, we should extend demonstrably successful policies like Rep. Fiedler’s Solar for Schools. Solar for Schools cut utility costs, saved taxpayers money, and increased the presence of solar power in Pennsylvania. We cannot stop there; in Harrisburg, I’ll support legislation that continues this programs legacy and work to build renewable infrastructure and reduce utility costs.

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?

Natural Gas and Coal have been the main source of power generation throughout the history of our state. While these industries provide necessary revenue and maintain good jobs for Pennsylvanian’s, we need to be looking at our future.

I would push legislation to increase the amount of energy sourced from renewables like solar and wind so that we may reduce our reliance on carbon-based power generation, which causes pollution. These projects will produce their own jobs, and existing infrastructure for power distribution still requires workers to maintain it. In an ideal world i would want to see use of renewables for power generation up to 50% in the next 5 years, and look at increase that every year after.

Article 1 Section 27 of the Pennsylvania states, “The people have a right to clean air, pure water, and to the preservation of the natural, scenic, historic and esthetic values of the environment. Pennsylvania’s public natural resources are the common property of all the people, including generations yet to come. As trustee of these resources, the Commonwealth shall conserve and maintain them for the benefit of all the people.”

It is literally written in our founding documents that we take care of our environment. Decreasing our use of fossil fuels for power generation is a furthering of the ideals set in place by those founders.

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?

In addition to PA being the second largest producer of natural gas and nuclear energy, as well as the third largest producer of coal, and ranking 45th in terms of wind, solar and hydropower energy production; PA is the fourth highest carbon-emitting state in the country.

PA also recently exited the RGGI, thus eliminating the Commonwealth’s primary climate policy. In addition, PA has numerous data centres being built which will add to the water, noise, and heat pollution while consuming large amounts of energy. Finally, the evergy demand is expected to grow over time while energy generation has been declining.

All this makes it critical for policy makers to be creative in finding incentives to generate clean energy. Modernizing fossil fuels to transition to co-located energy systems where gas plants pair with on-site solar and battery storage to ensure baseload relaibility. Nuclear energy provides zero-emission, very reliable baseload that compliments intermittent renewables. Expanding utility-scale solar arrays, wind and geo-thermal energy sources. Intergrating grid-enhancing technologies to manage large industrial and data-center loads, to avoid power bottlenecks.

KEYWORDS: renewable energy, solar power, geothermal, GRID, fossil fuel, nuclear energy, data center,

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?

While I am not opposed to nuclear energy, the Commonwealth must hasten its investment in renewals and diversifying energy and resources must be a priority for capitol investment now as energy costs for everyday Pennsylvanians sky rockets.

Further, I am a strong advocate for publicly owned utilities and would support efforts to make them possible for Pennsylvania families.

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.

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?

While Pennsylvania has a strong history as an energy-producing state, there is a clear opportunity to diversify and expand our renewable energy portfolio. While natural gas, nuclear energy, and other traditional sources have played a significant role in our energy economy, I believe Pennsylvania should begin shifting toward a greater reliance on renewable energy sources, including wind, solar, and hydropower.

I am a strong proponent of renewable energy and believe we should be creating policies that incentivize its growth. Expanding renewable energy will help reduce pollution, protect public health, create good-paying jobs, and position Pennsylvania for the future. This includes supporting investments in solar and wind development, improving energy efficiency, modernizing our electric grid, and making it easier for communities, businesses, and residents to participate in the clean energy transition.

As we make this shift, we must ensure that our energy system remains reliable and affordable for Pennsylvania families and businesses. A responsible transition requires thoughtful planning, investment, and support for workers and communities impacted by changes in our energy economy. Pennsylvania has a significant opportunity to move toward a cleaner, more sustainable energy future while continuing to support economic growth across the Commonwealth.

KEYWORDS: Incentivize; Diversification; Expand Renewable

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?

I would support a push to install solar panels above large parking lots. I believe renewable energy production is a burgeoning industry in PA that should nurtured and encouraged alongside our current energy production.

KEYWORDS: Renewable energy growth

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?

In the face of an affordability crisis where costs of energy are rising exponentially, we need to be looking into expanding renewable energy as a solution. Not only does renewable energy lower our emissions and keep energy supplies reliable, it keeps money in the pockets of Pennsylvanians and helps to create new jobs in our communities.

We can’t abandon the energy sources that helped shape this state and that so many rely on for employment right now, but by modernizing our grid with renewables alongside them, we can bring ourselves into the future.

In Harrisburg, I’ll fight to get creative renewables programs like community solar across the finish line, so families can get access to cheaper, cleaner power. I’ll work for investments in clean energy projects that will bring more jobs and lower our utility costs. The way we build affordability into the energy transition is by diversifying our energy supply in a practical, responsible way that leaves no Pennsylvanian behind.

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 rapidly expand wind, solar, energy storage, and efficiency while reducing its dependence on coal and natural gas. I support stronger renewable-energy standards, faster permitting for responsible clean-energy projects, investments in the electric grid, and transition assistance for workers and communities affected by fossil-fuel decline. Nuclear power can continue to provide carbon-free reliability as we build a cleaner, more affordable energy system.

KEYWORDS: Renewable energy, just transition, grid modernization

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 move toward a cleaner energy mix by balancing its reliable power plants with more wind and solar energy. Supported by economic and power grid research, this approach helps keep our energy reliable and affordable while cutting pollution and expanding renewable power across the state. To support this shift, I would support legislation that updates clean energy targets to encourage growth, streamline local permits so landowners can host solar or wind projects without endless red tape, keep our zero-emission nuclear plants running, and use federal funding to turn old industrial sites into new clean energy hubs.

KEYWORDS: clean energy

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 maintain a diverse, all-of-the-above energy portfolio that includes our strong natural gas and nuclear industries while expanding clean, reliable options — particularly home-based geothermal and solar.

I strongly support restoring tax incentives for homeowners who install solar and geothermal systems. Geothermal is especially valuable because the technology can last well over 100 years, significantly reduces stress on the electric grid, and delivers major long-term savings on energy costs for families.

Additionally, to accelerate adoption across Pennsylvania, I would create zero-interest loan programs to help homeowners and small businesses install geothermal systems. This approach strengthens energy independence, lowers household costs for generations, and helps modernize our grid in a way that benefits families rather than burdening ratepayers.

KEYWORDS: Geothermal, Solar

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?

Pa has the natural gas, nuclear and coal. We have the resources and we know how to do these. Pa should do more of what we have and build on that and do it even better. Then we can even help our neighbors and make energy more efficient for everyone. We simply hold up progress through overregulating.

Q1 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, PFAS should be restricted in PA. I would rely on recent scientific studies and agencies that rely on valid scientific studies including numerous universities, NIH, EPA, FDA, DOD, ASDWA, ITRC, ECOS, and ERIS, etc. As an elected official, I would support policies and legislation that promote public health safety. It is important that HB 2145 receives similar support in the PA Senate as it did the PA House of Representatives.

KEYWORDS: Scientific studies, PFAS, restricted, HB 2145, Senate

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?

Referring to the science behind vaccine efficacy and best approaches to vaccine hesitancy, as an elected official, I would work with local, cultural, and faith leaders as models of vaccination confidence. Also, countering vaccination misinformation using proven data is essential. Four people have died in PA, epicenter of the measles outbreak, and these deaths could have been preventable. Hundreds in PA, mostly all unvaccinated, have become sick with the measles. While mild reactions may occur after vaccination, the instances of severe adverse reactions occurring are very few. For vaccinations in general, severe adverse reactions occur from 1:100,000 to 1:1,000,000 doses (Biomedicines, 2023). The WHO provides reaction sheets for various vaccines. Vaccinations build immunity which help save lives. As an elected official, I’ll also model vaccine confidence and support efforts that reduce vaccine hesitancy and support public health safety.

KEYWORDS: Vaccine, efficacy, hesitancy, confidence, misinformation, measles, preventable, reactions, Biomedicines, WHO

Q1 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. The research provided by vetted professionals.

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?

As a Federal candidate, I cannot dictate state policies, but I strongly support vaccination policies as a means of protecting society.

Q1 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 do believe that we need to place restrictions on PFAS chemicals in Pennsylvania. This is largely due to the fact that they can build up in our ecosystems and resist the natural process of degradation. The impact to wildlife and human life is very concerning.

KEYWORDS: ecosystem, impact, restrictions

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 our state Department of Health needs to do everything in its power to educate our communities that the MMR vaccine is indeed safe and effective. As a policy maker, we need to ensure that there are mandates in place, but I don’t believe that alone is enough. My priority would be to engage communities with transparency, respect, and evidence-based information while ensuring everyone has convenient access to vaccines.

KEYWORDS: evidence-based, mandates, effective, transparency

Q1 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 am a co-sponsor of House Bill 2145 and fully support the provisions to eliminate the use of PFAS in everyday products.

I have also supported legislation to remove PFAS from clothing, specifically protective gear for firefighters and to ban the use in firefighting foam (I’m a co-sponsor of House Bill 1261). I believe scientific evidence from environmental experts (US EPA, PA DEP, Nature Conservancy, ECOS) coupled with healthcare experts (CDC, NASEM) and healthcare professional organizations (ACOG, AAP, AAFP) more than provide the evidence-based information which detail the negative effects of PFAS chemical.

KEYWORDS: Negative Effects, Evidence-based, Eliminate

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 is important to understand why people have lost faith in the medical and scientific communities when it comes to vaccines. I think the best way to do so is to dig in and try to understand the concerns and address those one by one.

I think we have proven a mandate for people to do something only makes them more skeptical and distrustful. I think the best thing is also to have people talking to people. Not elected leaders telling people what to do. It might take time, but I think we need to identify the trusted individuals in the communities and provide them with the factual information to disseminate.

We also need to find the local stories which bear out the research and highlight the successes or, sadly, the bad outcomes.

KEYWORDS: Understand, No mandates, Facts

Q1 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.

Q1 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:

1. Cancer: Increased risk of kidney, prostate, and testicular cancers.
2. Hormonal Disruption: Potential interference with endocrine functions, affecting reproductive health and development.
3. Immune System Effects: Reduced vaccine response and increased susceptibility to infections.
4. 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.

Q1 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 have worked with Representative Scott to make sure we voted the Bill out of committee hopefully the Senate will vote it out also so that we can get it to the Governor’s desk and make it the law in Pennsylvania

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 would continue to work with health professionals to implement best practices on how to bring awareness and keep our most vulnerable population, safe and healthy

Q1 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.

Q1 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. The documented evidence of the significant relationship between exposure and detrimental health risks.

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?

Support HB 1828, & 120 and any other bills presented for vaccinations that are based in science. Community engagement needs to focus on early intervention utilizing public services such, as CFSS, schools and other outreach programs.

Q1 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?

Look, PFAS chemicals have been around a while, and some studies show they stick around longer than your in-laws at Thanksgiving. I’m all for protecting public health, so if the science — solid, peer-reviewed stuff — shows these chemicals cause real harm, then yes, we should restrict them. But let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I believe in encouraging safer, organic alternatives like those promoted by the MAHA movement, rather than sweeping bans that could hurt businesses without clear benefits.

Let’s be smart and keep Pennsylvania safe without stifling innovation.

KEYWORDS: PFAS, science-based, organic alternatives

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?

People want to feel heard, not preached to — especially when it comes to their health. I’m all about honest conversations and respecting personal choice. Vaccines have their place, but so does informed consent.

I support policies that encourage education and dialogue, not heavy-handed mandates. And hey, I’m a fan of natural immunity and organic health options where they make sense — the MAHA way. Let’s build trust and keep communities safe without turning this into a political wrestling match.

I feel personality measles vaccinations are safe.

KEYWORDS: Informed consent, community trust, natural immunity

Q1 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 Pennsylvania should take a science-based approach to PFAS restrictions when credible evidence shows significant risks to health or the environment and safer alternatives exist. If elected, I would rely on sound scientific evidence and consider both public health and the practical impact on consumers and businesses. Protecting Pennsylvanians should remain the priority.

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 Pennsylvanians can protect public health while respecting individual liberty, parental rights, and medical freedom.

Measles is serious and contagious, but Pennsylvanians also deserve honest answers about vaccine safety, effectiveness, exemptions, and the proper role of government. I believe medical decisions should be guided by informed consent, reliable information, and trusted healthcare professionals—not government coercion.

As a State Representative, I will support transparency, voluntary access to healthcare and vaccines, and practical public-health measures while opposing forced medical treatment and blanket mandates.

We can protect public health without sacrificing personal freedom. The goal should be to build trust through facts, transparency, and respect—not fear or government overreach.

Q1 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, The study and recommendations by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.

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?

Giving the population all the information they need to make an informed decision for their lives and their families. After the many failed COVID policies, people are understandably skeptical of future policies in this area. Moving forward, any policy should include a recommendation and a procedure for how to quarantine oneself if one contracts the infectious disease.

Q1 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?

CDC Agency for Toxic Substances reports that these PFAS contain carbon-fluorine bonds that do not naturally break down in water, soil, or the human body, leading to permanent accumulation over time.

The EPA also reports exposure to these chemicals cause cancer, liver damage, hormone disruption, and weakened immune system.

KEYWORDS: Forever Chemicals, health risks, permanent accumulation, global contamination, cancer

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?

As a policymaker, my stance emphasizes the benefits of protecting children, school safety, & preventing avoidable outbreaks, by leading with transparent local data, partnering with trusted experts in the field, and emphasizing community protection.

I am actively advocating to improve local, rural healthcare funding & accessibility, which includes expanding vaccination education and outbreak response infrastructure.

KEYWORDS: Protecting Children, school safety, avoidable outbreaks, outbreak response infrastructure

Q1 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?

As a federal candidate, I would support legislation that prohibits PFAS in our water, food, medication, and cosmetics.

KEYWORDS: PFAS

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?

As a Biology major in college, I understand disease transmission. No political party, religion, nor personal philosophy can prevent a disease from infecting another person, only behaviors and immunity, rooted in evidence-based science can.

As a parent, I encourage other parents to check in with each other about their vaccine philosophy. As a U.S. Representative, I would work on legislation that allows vaccine records to be made public in order to empower parents, especially, to make decisions about how those who aren’t fully vaccinated are grouped in settings including daycares, church nurseries, mommy groups, etc. This would ensure the “personal freedoms” so many cry for while keeping safe those who are most vulnerable.

Since 2017, when I discovered a secret antivaxxer in my mommy group, I have raised my voice against anti-vaccine rhetoric. I wrote emails gently reminding parents to check each other’s vaccine philosophy. I joined Voices for Vaccines and I met with my State Representative in 2018. I have written Letters to the Editor, exposing the hidden threat of disease transmission in Pennsylvania daycares and church nurseries. I also wrote a work of fiction, EPISTOLARY, about measles in a mommy group, under the pen name Lisa Lambros.

KEYWORDS: disease transmission, antivaccine

Q1 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 absolutely restrict PFAS in consumer products, and I support HB 2145 and Representative Scott’s efforts to help protect Pennsylvanians against these forever chemicals.

The scientific evidence of the myriad risks to human (and environmental) health is extensive, and even the current administration’s EPA and NIH acknowledge the dangers. One needn’t look far to learn that PFAS are real, are ubiquitous, and are dangerous especially to younger individuals; and while this proposed legislation may not address ALL sources of PFAS (their use in industrial, military, firefighting, and aeronautical applications are based in safety), it will significantly reduce the potential exposure to humans and therefore to our ecosystem.

Hopefully this will result in a measurable reduction in PFAS in the coming years. My decision will be based on scientific research from trusted institutions at the local, state, and federal (from reputable, non-politically-biased) levels.

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 feel that this presents a valuable opportunity to show those concerned communities the power of science and evidence-based facts regarding the efficacy of vaccines. The correlation in decreased vaccination rates and increased measles cases seems to be fairly straightforward, and being transparent with those data should help to re-gain the trust of individuals who have grown wary of vaccines.

By hopefully invoking the help of legislators with a medical background, this trust can be fortified. By increasing visibility through public media campaigns and through educational curricula, we can reignite the need for awareness that will hopefully result in sensible vaccinations for measles and other seemingly “once cured” infectious diseases. I would support policies that inform and educate the citizens, by engaging with the medical community rather than policymakers with potential special interests.

Q1 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. I am leading on the federal level on a bipartisan legislative push to eliminate toxic “forever chemicals” (PFAS) from everyday consumer goods, focusing specifically on two key bills: the Keep Food Containers Safe from PFAS Act and the No PFAS in Cosmetics Act. These bills focus on direct pathways of human exposure where chemicals can leach straight into food or be absorbed through the skin. There are well-documented health risks linked to PFAS, including hormone disruption, liver disease, thyroid dysfunction, and various cancers. These uniform federal standards builds on similar phase-outs already enacted in several individual states.

KEYWORDS: PFAS health safety

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?

Regarding vaccines for highly transmissible, and widely studied diseases, I think it is important to approach communities with vaccine hesitancy with data and facts concerning safety and personal and public health benefits. While acknowledging distrust that may exist, I will support funding for public education efforts and expanding health resources for vaccines for those who the community where access and affordability remains an issue.

KEYWORDS: Health access affordability

Q1 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?

Pennsylvania should restrict the use of PFAS chemicals in consumer products. I support and voted for House Bill 2145 which would ban PFAS chemicals in certain products, and I also support and voted for House Bill 1261 to prohibit PFAS in firefighting foam and firefighting gear.

Exposure to PFAS can lead to a number of health risks including immune system suppression, increased cholesterol, hormonal disruption, and higher risk of cancer. These “forever chemicals” can accumulate in the human body over time. Scientific evidence from environmental groups and agencies (EPA) as well as research from Stanford University and the National Institutes of Health and experts from the CDC provide ample evidence-based information on the dangers posed by PFAS chemicals.

KEYWORDS: Restrict PFAS chemicals

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?

The increased rise in measles cases and the recent measles related deaths of two Pennsylvanians from measles, which are Pennsylvania’s first in 35 years, demonstrates the importance of being vaccinated against measles.

It is important to hear the concerns of members of the public regarding vaccine safety and to provide fact-based evidence from trusted members of the medical and scientific communities to address those concerns through educational outreach and dialogue with the public.

Establishing Vaccine Education Workgroups of physicians, pharmacists, parents, public health leaders, and community representatives can strengthen public communication and combat misinformation.

KEYWORDS: Vaccine education outreach

Q1 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 these chemicals should be restricted. According to the U.S. EPA long term or elevated exposure can impact health with increased cancer risks, suppression of the immune system and reproductive issues.

KEYWORDS: Cancer, Immune System, Reproductive issues

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 would approach these communities with facts that support immunization as well as methods to protect oneself from exposure. I would propose policy that would limit the exclusions for vaccination. Exclusions have been increased since COVID allowing for many to utilize these under non valid reasons.

KEYWORDS: Immunization, exposure, exclusion

Q1 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, especially where those chemicals are intentionally added and safer alternatives are available. PFAS are often called “forever chemicals” for a reason: many of them persist in the environment, build up in the human body, and create exposure pathways that families never knowingly signed up for. When we are talking about products like cosmetics, dental floss, menstrual products, and children’s products, the burden should be on manufacturers to prove those chemicals are necessary and safe, not on the public to absorb the risk.

The scientific case for action is strong enough to justify restrictions now. I would rely on three kinds of evidence. First, exposure science shows that PFAS are highly persistent and that many people already have measurable PFAS in their blood. Second, human epidemiology reviewed by EPA, ATSDR, and the National Academies links PFAS exposure to higher cholesterol, reduced vaccine response and other immune effects, pregnancy-related harms, lower birth weight, and increased risk of some cancers. Third, toxicology reviews, including the National Toxicology Program’s work on PFOA and PFOS, show credible evidence of immune-system harm. Science is still evolving across the thousands of PFAS compounds, but that uncertainty is a reason to be more careful with non-essential uses, not less.

That is why a targeted approach like House Bill 2145 makes sense. As of July 24, 2026, the bill has passed the House and is in the Senate after being referred on June 11, 2026. It focuses on intentionally added PFAS in a defined set of consumer products and includes carveouts for things like FDA-approved drugs and medical devices. That is a practical, science-informed way to reduce avoidable exposure while still recognizing that some uses may require a different regulatory path.

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 would start from two truths at once: measles is a serious public-health threat, and trust matters. If people have concerns about vaccine safety, the answer is not to mock them or wave them off. It is to meet them with clear facts, honest risk communication, and trusted local messengers like pediatricians, family doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and community leaders. People deserve straight answers about what measles does, what the MMR vaccine does, what side effects are known, and what claims are simply false.

On policy, I support a practical prevention-first approach. That means making vaccines easy to get through school-based clinics, mobile clinics, extended hours, pharmacy access where appropriate, and strong catch-up outreach for families who missed doses. It also means real-time outbreak communication, support for local health departments doing contact tracing and exposure notices, and making sure schools and child care centers are following existing immunization rules consistently. I would defend medical exemptions, but I would be cautious about expanding loopholes that make outbreaks more likely. When vaccination rates fall below the level needed to prevent spread, everyone pays the price, especially infants, immunocompromised people, and families who did everything they should but are still exposed.

The science here is strong. The MMR vaccine has been studied for decades and is safe and highly effective, with two doses about 97% effective against measles. There is no credible evidence linking MMR vaccination to autism. Measles, on the other hand, is extremely contagious and can cause pneumonia, encephalitis, hospitalization, and in some cases death. Using Pennsylvania’s official school data, statewide kindergarten MMR coverage was 95.5% in the 2020-2021 school year and 93.7% in the 2024-2025 school year, which is a meaningful decline. Pennsylvania also now has a live measles dashboard because of active 2026 spread. My approach would be simple: treat people respectfully, tell the truth clearly, and make the healthy choice the easy choice.

Q1 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 when they pose a risk to safety. I use peer-reviewed scientific research to inform my decisions about public health. We owe it to the public to keep them safe from chemicals such as PFAS.

I fully support HB 2145 and was glad to see it passed the House in June.

KEYWORDS: Public Health, Accountability, Safety

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?

Mis- and disinformation around vaccines are alarming. We can not allow decades of progress to erode. Relational organizing can be helpful here, people are more willing to listen to local leaders such as pastors and doctors.

I also think we need more education on this issue so people understand how important vaccines are.

KEYWORDS: Measles, Vaccines, Education

Q1 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 exposure poses a lifelong risk to our health and must be regulated accordingly. In my role as State Policy Manager at Conservation Voters of PA, I’ve been a staunch advocate for restricting PFAS and have worked with IAFF Local 302 in Allentown to ban its use in firefighting foam.

As State Representative, I will work closely with the DEP to expand funding for testing and remediation. I promise to prioritize the health of Bucks County residents regardless of which corporations try to interfere.

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?

Vaccines work, and science has proven that they’re safe and effective. Cutting through the online misinformation that suggests otherwise is going to be a challenge, but expanding access and increasing vaccination rates will save lives.

It’s up to leaders and elected officials, including State Representatives, to rebuild public trust in vaccines, and that outreach needs to start with a statewide information campaign.

I will work not only to establish a program for flagging misinformation on social media, but to continue working on the House majority’s mission to provide health care access to every Pennsylvanian who needs it.

Q1 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, I am actually a cosponsor of this legislation and have also introduced other legislation regarding the restriction of PFAs. When researching legislation, I focus on human-health effects, dose-response and exposure levels, environmental persistence, bioaccumulation, exposure pathways, safer alternatives, and Pennsylvania-specific contamination data.

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 think the first responsibility of a policymaker is to listen to people’s concerns respectfully and make sure they have access to clear, evidence-based information from trusted medical and public-health professionals. At the same time, we have to be honest about the evidence: measles is highly contagious, two doses of the MMR vaccine are about 97% effective, and Pennsylvania has now reported 731 confirmed cases across 38 counties in 2026, including four deaths. I would support policies that make vaccination easier and more accessible, including expanded community vaccination clinics, outreach through trusted community organizations, transparent communication about both vaccine benefits and potential side effects, and strong disease surveillance and outbreak response. Public policy should be grounded in the best available scientific evidence while recognizing that maintaining public trust is essential to effective public health.

Q1 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 that public safety in Pennsylvania requires significant restrictions on the use of PFAS. I would support HB2145 and I would also like to see HB2145 amended with the addition of product families identified in the New Jersey “Protecting Against Forever Chemicals Act” including carpets, apparel, fabric treatments, and food packaging with paper and cardboard. Remediation and filtering of pre- and polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) in water supplies, though possible, is excessively expensive prompting the effort to instead significantly reduce or eliminate the use and consumption of the sources of PFAS substances. Conclusions from studies such as the DuPont chemical spill class-action suit settlement “C8 Health Project” study, the “National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey” by the CDC, and the ATSDR Multi-Site PFAS Health Studies by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) have shown significantly probable links of PFAS chemicals to a large variety of dangerous human and mammalian ailments.

KEYWORDS: PFAS, polyfluoroalkyl, prefluoroalkyl

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?

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States in the spring of 2020, vaccinations have become highly politicized by people susceptible to unsubstantiated thoroughly debunked conspiracy theories. Before the onset of politization there are communities with strong philosophical and religious objections to vaccines. These beliefs are extremely difficult, if not impossible, to overcome. As a legislator, I would support a dual approach to the problem. The first evidence-based effort would be to adequately fund public health nurses and administrators. Talking to public health nurses, significant under funding of public health education remains a serious problem in Pennsylvania. The second approach comes from observing the effectiveness of Trump and MAGA messaging through advertising, as outlandishly childish as the messaging was. “Flooding the zone” with creative engaging advertising of the safety and effectiveness of vaccines could be an effective tool to push the vaccination needle upward.

KEYWORDS: vaccination, public health

Q1 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. I support the approach in HB 2145 to restrict intentionally added PFAS in products such as cosmetics, dental floss, and children’s products.

I would look at peer-reviewed health studies, Pennsylvania exposure data, and scientific reviews from the CDC and EPA. Research linking certain PFAS to kidney cancer and reduced immune response gives us reason to act. We should also consider how much exposure people actually receive and make sure replacement chemicals are safer.

Manufacturers need reasonable time to adjust, but uncertainty about every possible risk should not keep us from addressing the risks we already understand.

KEYWORDS: PFAS restrictions; Safer alternatives; Exposure risk

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 would first ask why people are going unvaccinated. Is it a personal decision, a concern about safety, or difficulty getting an appointment or paying for care? Those call for different responses.

People deserve honest answers about vaccine benefits and risks, respect for their choices, and privacy in their medical care. I would work with local doctors and community leaders to answer questions and encourage measles vaccination.

If someone wants a vaccine but cannot afford it or reach a provider, government can and should help, especially during an outbreak. I support free or low-cost clinics, convenient hours, and mobile services where needed. I would measure whether those efforts actually reduce cost and access barriers.

Public health officials should provide timely exposure notices while protecting patients’ identities. We can help families protect themselves and their neighbors without publicly disclosing anyone’s medical decisions.

KEYWORDS: Individual choice; Vaccine access; Medical privacy

Q1 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. I am a co-sponsor of SB611 which is comprehensive legislation around PFAS classification and cleanup. This remains a grave issue in PA and I would support legislation to ban it in commercial products.

My team extensively researches this type of issue before we support, we’re firm beleivers in scientific reseasrch.

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?

The measles outbreaks in PA very concerning, particularly in Lebanon and Lancaster Counties. A major concern is that they are all preventable. The war on vaccines is real and we are seeing the consequences. We encourage vaccines as a major piece of public health. My district is quite diverse and we have been very active in the public health realm starting with vacine clinics during the pandemic and supporting the new Delaware County Health Department.

Q1 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, especially when safer choices are available. People should be able to trust that the products they buy and bring into their homes are safe. PFAS are often called “forever chemicals” because they can stay in our bodies and our environment for a very long time. Research has linked some PFAS to cancer, immune system problems, and other serious health concerns.

I would look at peer-reviewed research and information from trusted sources like the EPA, Pennsylvania DEP, and independent scientists. I would also keep listening to new research as we learn more.

We should follow the science and focus first on PFAS that pose the greatest risk and on products where safer choices already exist. Pennsylvania families should not have to find out years from now that something they used every day was putting their health at risk. When the science shows there is a real danger, we should act before people get hurt, not after.

KEYWORDS: Public Health, Scientific Evidence, PFAS Regulation

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?

People should be able to ask questions about their health and get honest answers. We do not build trust by talking down to people or ignoring their concerns. Parents and families should be able to talk with their doctors, ask questions, and make informed choices about their health. The science shows that the MMR vaccine is safe and works well at preventing measles. We also know that measles can be very serious, especially for young children and people with weak immune systems.

As a lawmaker, I would work to make vaccines easy to get for people who want them. I would also make sure families have clear facts and that our local health departments are ready to act when an outbreak happens.

Good public health starts with trust. Government should listen to people, give them the facts, and be honest about what we know. Our health policies should be based on strong science while respecting the people those policies are meant to serve.

KEYWORDS: Public Health, Informed Choice, Medical Science

Q1 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. My decision would be guided by peer-reviewed scientific research, as well as assessments from the Pennsylvania Departments of Health and Environmental Protection, the EPA, CDC, and other credible public health agencies.

PFAS chemicals persist in the environment and can build up in the human body over time. Research has raised serious concerns about potential links to cancer, reproductive and developmental harms, immune system impacts, and other health risks.

I believe this bill’s focus on products such as cosmetics, dental floss, menstrual products, food packaging, and other everyday consumer goods is a practical and responsible step toward reducing unnecessary exposure.

KEYWORDS: Public health, consumer safety, accountability

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?

As a parent, I understand that families want to feel confident they are making the best decisions for their children. My approach would be to listen to concerns respectfully, make sure people have access to clear information from doctors and public health experts, and avoid treating honest questions as something to dismiss. At the same time, we can’t ignore the real danger of preventable outbreaks.

Measles is highly contagious, and vaccines remain one of the safest and most effective tools we have to protect children, seniors, and people with weakened immune systems. I would support making vaccines easier to access through community clinics, schools, pharmacies, and local health providers. I would also support strengthening public health education and outreach.

Finally, I would support maintaining evidence-based school immunization requirements with legitimate medical exemptions respected. Families deserve both compassion and accurate information, and our policies should help protect individual children while also keeping entire communities safe.

KEYWORDS: Trust, access, prevention

Q1 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 would support legislation in cases where replicable scientific studies show direct harm from specific products. I oppose legislation based solely on innuendo and suspicions. I am not an expert on PFAS, but I have general concerns about the lasting effects of chemicals we take in that do not break down over time. Initial exposure may not be as dangerous as the cumulative effect from concentrations that accumulate in the body over time. Longitudinal animal studies should be able to model the risk of different exposure levels over time, within the framework of the experiments at least. As an aside, if PFAS are as dangerous as seems to be feared, I am surprised that the list of products in the sample bill is as short as it is. The list of items specifically not covered by the legislation is much longer than the list of those that are.

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?

While unvaccinated populations are clearly more at risk from measles, the US had become practically measles-free until 2023 when case numbers rose dramatically. There are those who blame the people who got sick for not being vaccinated (which may or not be true on an individual basis). However, I am prone to blame the recent bump in measles cases on the importation of millions of unvaccinated people from around the globe from places that have worse health and hygiene practices than we typically have in the US. I would revert to long-standing practices of health screening at the border and possible isolation of people with dangerous diseases until they recover. The practices of the US Government during the time of COVID damaged public trust in government institutions and in the administrators in positions to deal with health emergencies.

KEYWORDS: measles, immigration, trust

Q1 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 have a friend who works as an environmental scientist and studies PFAS for a lab in Indiana, PA. She has explained to me the work they are doing to understand how these chemicals breakdown (or don’t) in the environment and what research they are attempting to do to understand the long-term environmental impacts that may occur.

My understanding is that we do not have direct evidence that PFAS is harmful to consumers except for biproducts that occur during manufacturing and when it is heated above 300C. This is a risk that should be taken into consideration when we are using PFAS in coatings for cookware that can be heated to high heats repeatedly for years.

I am also of the understanding that where harm has not been proven that does not mean that there is no harm occurring, it just means we need to fund better science to ensure safety or conclusively demonstrate harm.

I am concerned about the risk that these chemicals MIGHT pose, and I believe that House Bill 2145 is trying to specifically limit product such as medical, cosmetic, dental, menstrual, and children’s products from being possible avenues of exposure. I am not sure that I believe the science warrants an action like this and would be interested to speak with someone who is more knowledgeable about this before I could say confidently that I would support it. I suppose if I were making a decision about a bill like this I may request to meet with a member of an organization such as yours.

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 am a nurse, and I am a proud supporter of vaccines. I have advocated for vaccines many times both professionally and personally, and I believe that the current crisis could be entirely resolved with improvement in vaccination rates.

I believe that we have had a collapse in the trust that people have in modern medicine. This is because of many factors including literal and direct attacks on science by the current federal administration, but I also believe that people feel let down by our medical system mostly because of systemic inequalities that are being driven by financial incentives that are misaligned from the goal of providing quality healthcare to patients.

It is a huge part of my platform to try to address some of these misaligned incentives, to reinvest in rural healthcare, to promote preventative care, and to push back on the monopolistic and profit-driven system that is destroying the quality of our healthcare for working class people in this state.

Q1 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?

Concerns about plastics and poisons leeching into our fresh water supplies is a major concern in my post-mining industry region. I would support legislation protecting consumers from these significant contaminants.

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?

This is a difficult issue. I don’t know how much “vaccine education” can solve this problem. Pediatricians need to be supportive of these vaccines. I know someone formerly from the vaccine industry who has shared some uncomfortable stories about the manufacturing process. People need to have full faith and trust in what they put into their children’s bodies, but the increase of home schooling communities that will use their children’s health as an exercise of freedom seems to be increasing. I do believe in the power of vaccination. I would like to support initiatives that expand the use.

Q1 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 Pennsylvania should continue moving toward restricting PFAS in consumer products where the scientific evidence shows they’re unnecessary and pose a meaningful risk to public health or the environment. As a nurse, I understand that protecting people’s health sometimes means acting before the damage becomes irreversible.

That said, I also believe policy should be driven by evidence—not headlines or politics. I would rely on peer-reviewed research, recommendations from independent public health and environmental scientists, toxicology data, exposure studies, and guidance from organizations like the EPA and National Academies. I’d also consider whether safer alternatives are available and what impact restrictions would have on consumers, workers, and manufacturers.

Good policy weighs both benefits and consequences. If the evidence demonstrates that a product creates unnecessary long-term health risks and safer alternatives exist, I believe we have a responsibility to act.

KEYWORDS: PFAS, Evidence-Based Policy, Public Health

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?

As a nurse, I’ve learned that people don’t respond well to being dismissed or shamed. If we want to improve vaccination rates and protect communities from outbreaks, we have to start by listening.

I’d support making accurate, evidence-based information easier to access through trusted local healthcare providers, schools, and community organizations while being transparent about both the benefits and potential risks of vaccines. Trust is earned through honest conversations, not mandates alone.

Measles is a highly contagious disease, and vaccines have played a major role in preventing serious illness for decades. I support ensuring vaccines remain readily available, affordable, and easy to access, while strengthening public health education and outbreak response.

Science should guide our decisions, but communication matters just as much. People deserve facts, respect, and the opportunity to ask questions without feeling judged.

KEYWORDS: Public Trust, Vaccine Education, Evidence-Based Health

Q1 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?

As PFAS can cause infertility, cancer, endocrine disruption, developmental delays in children, etc., I believe that Pennsylvania should restrict PFAS in consumer products. I would use peer-reviewed studies and comprehensive reviews by nonpartisan groups such as the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)’s 2021 Toxicological Profile for Perfluoroalkyl.

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?

Communities that are rural, isolated, or have a distrust in vaccine safety, can be reached through community engagement using trusted local leaders for education and by easing access to vaccines through things like mobile vaccine clinics.

Q1 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, and House Bill 2145 is a good place to start. These chemicals don’t break down. They build up in our bodies and in our water, and the CDC finds them in the blood of nearly every American it tests. The National Academies, the C8 Science Panel’s work with families in Ohio and West Virginia, and the International Agency for Research on Cancer have tied PFAS exposure to higher cholesterol, weaker immune response, lower birth weight, and kidney and testicular cancer.

I want science to shape the details, like which products are covered and which uses are truly essential. The evidence is strongest for drinking water and workplace exposure, and less certain for absorption through the skin. But when a chemical this persistent shows up in baby products, cosmetics, and menstrual products, and safer options exist, we shouldn’t keep adding it.

As a small business owner, I know fair timelines and clear rules matter. I’d give businesses a reasonable transition period and work alongside them to make the change.

KEYWORDS: PFAS, Prevention, Consumer Safety, Public Health

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?

Keeping our communities safe comes first. With over 1,000 measles cases in Pennsylvania this year, this is not abstract. Measles puts infants, cancer patients, and others who can’t be vaccinated at real risk, and every vaccinated neighbor helps protect them.

I also know that vaccination is a decision that families make with their doctors. Most parents with questions are not against science. They are worried about their kids, and they deserve to be heard. My job is to make sure they have the reliable information and easy access they need to choose well.

So I’d start by listening, the way my book, The Civil Graces Project, teaches us: assume good faith and treat people with dignity, even when we disagree. I’d support funding for local health departments to offer free clinics, including evenings, weekends, and mobile sites for rural families. I’d bring in trusted local pediatricians and nurses to answer questions honestly and with science, and make sure families get clear, timely information when an outbreak is near their school. Trust takes time to build, but it is the strongest protection a community has.

Sources: PA Department of Health measles update, 1,078 cases

KEYWORDS: Vaccinations, Public Health, Community Wellbeing

Q1 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 am actually leading the way on banning forever chemicals in firefighter foam, which is where our local water contamination where I live in Warminster came from. We passed it unanimously in the house and it passed unanimously in the Senate Veterans Affairs committee where I spoke in front of chairman Doug Mastriano. We’re hoping for a full vote in the Senate so we can get this critical piece of legislation to the governor’s desk.

You can see my comments before the Senate VA committee here: https://www.facebook.com/reel/1004633285552036

KEYWORDS: contamination, ban, co-sponsor

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?

The rise of disinformation and anti-vaccine sentiment is dangerous. I stand with medical experts and regularly hold flu/COVID vaccine clinics for constituents through my state office.

I co-sponsored HB 1828, protecting vaccine access in PA. As a two-time cancer survivor who is only alive thanks to the incredible work of scientists powering breakthroughs, I will always champion access to vaccines, affordable healthcare, and policies that protect the health and wellbeing of our communities.

KEYWORDS: experts, survivor, wellbeing

Q1 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?

Whenever possible, I think Pennsylvania should endeavor to reduce and even eliminate the use of PFAS in consumer products and instead seek to utilize materials which are more easily recycled or biodegradable.

There is no convenience which is worth the destruction of our planet.

KEYWORDS: Reduce, recycled, biodegradable

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?

The People have a right to make their own decisions about their own healthcare. What we can do as policymakers, is fund public education programs and funding to make vaccines accessible and affordable.

KEYWORDS: Healthcare, education, affordable.

Q1 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 would generally support science-based efforts to reduce Pennsylvanians’ exposure to PFAS, particularly where these chemicals pose unnecessary risks to public health and where safer alternatives are available. My decisions would be guided by the research and recommendations of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, the Pennsylvania Department of Health, and other independent scientific experts.

Pennsylvania has documented PFAS contamination in drinking water systems and communities across the Commonwealth, leading the state to establish maximum contaminant levels for two of the most studied PFAS chemicals. As additional peer-reviewed science-based research becomes available, we should continue to evaluate consumer products using the best available science to take targeted, evidence-based action to protect public health.

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 it’s important to engage communities by listening to their concerns, providing clear, evidence-based information, and partnering with trusted local healthcare providers and public health officials. People deserve accurate information so they can make informed decisions.

I will support policies that promote science-based education on vaccination, improve accessibility to immunizations in communities that lack reliable access to preventative care, and ensure our public health agencies have the resources to respond quickly to outbreaks. Vaccines have been proven to be one of the safest and most effective tools for preventing the spread of diseases like measles, and maintaining high vaccination rates helps protect vulnerable individuals who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons.

My approach will continue to be guided by the best available scientific evidence and the expertise of public health professionals.

Q1 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 need to be removed from any item used in the creation of ingestible products, for any organic organism. Many of the products that we use on a daily basis, like cosmetics, dental floss, and menstrual products, contain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS,) which are a group of over 7,800 human-made chemicals that are used due to their ability to repel dirt, water, and grease. These chemicals, which do not break down in the environment, have been found to potentially cause serious health problems, such as cancer, immune system suppression, increased cholesterol levels, pregnancy-induced hypertension, liver damage, reduced fertility, and increased risk of thyroid disease.

I have a track record of supporting legislative efforts such as PA HB 2145, which sought to address the issues I’ve stated above. Environmental scientists across the United States have sounded the alarms on this issue since the 1960s. Corporations knew what would happen to our bodies, and part of the accountability I support is holding them wholly responsible for the deaths that’ll be associated with this 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?

We desperately need capital investment in political education, sexual health and the sciences, as well as serious federal investment in public health infrastructure.

We must change the antagonistic and adversarial relationship between Americans and their healthcare. The working class is likely to suffer the lion’s share of fatalities when these outbreaks and pandemics take shape. We keep each other safe, and a plan to provide Universal Healthcare is the first step there.

Q1 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?

Based on current findings, PFAS represent a substantial public health threat at very low levels. The production and use of PFAS should be severely restricted in PA where suitable alternative chemicals exist. Additionally, PFAS remediation strategies need to be explored to decontaminate potable water supplies in drinking water.

I understand there are some promising new technologies employing microbes to attack and break down PFAS. This technology is admittedly early stage, but should be explored using available federal and state funds.

There are available studies sponsored by the EPA and the NIH outlining toxicity threats.

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?

As of September 3, PA has confirmed 540 cases across 36 counties. This represents a serious public health risk. I am concerned that vaccine hesitancy has been increased by suspect statements from federal HHS leadership. I would greatly prefer that these leaders correct the record and emphasize the significant health threat posed by reduced vaccination rates.

Infants too young to be vaccinated have been infected and there have been deaths due to measles - a disease that was considered eliminated in the not so distant past.

I feel it is reasonable to require current vaccinations for attendance in public schools, and for all those employed in healthcare. This would include the full slate of vaccines. Also, all these “required” vaccines should be available through all private insurance companies with $0 deductible. For those reliant on Medicaid or other public health programs, I feel the state / federal government should fully fund vaccination costs.

Sadly, I feel it would be counter-productive to attempt to force vaccinations beyond school attendance and employment restrictions noted above.

Q1 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?

It is critical to public health and environmental stability that Pennsylvania places strong restrictions on “forever chemicals” (PFAS). To inform my decision on House Bill 2145 and future legislation, I will rely heavily on robust, peer-reviewed scientific research, epidemiological studies, and environmental data.

Your highly convenient and vital resource for an evidence-based vote is the Scientsit Network for Advancing Policy (SNAP) website, which bridges the gap between early-career researchers nd policy solutions. However, beyond curated platforms, I am fully educated in how to independently locate, evaluate, and synthesize primary scientific literature.

My decisions will be guided by toxicological data from agencies like the EPA and CDC, tracking PFAS bioaccumulation in human tissue and its links to adverse health outcomes, including metabolic disruption and immune system suppression. Furthermore, I will utilize hydrological and soil testing data specific to Pennsylvania’s waterways to identify contamination hotspots. By balancing cutting-edge peer-reviewed research with community-level environmental monitoring, I will support policies that protect Pennsylvanians from cumulative chemical exposure while ensuring our regulatory frameworks are grounded in definitive, non-partisan science.

KEYWORDS: forever-chemicals, serum concentration kinetics, PFAS maternal-fetal transfer, PFAS human biological half-life

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?

As both a public health expert and a public school nurse, I view declining MMR vaccination rates—now at 92.5%, below the 95% herd immunity threshold—as an urgent student safety crisis. With 66 confirmed cases emerging across Pennsylvania this year, top-down mandates alone fail. My approach centers on high-touch community engagement: holding empathetic, non-judgmental listening sessions in schools and community centers where parents can voice safety anxieties directly to frontline clinicians.

I will counter misinformation not with lectures, but with transparent, accessible, and non-partisan data highlighting the severe risks of measles complications versus proven vaccine safety profiles.

Politically, I support policies that strengthen the authority and funding of school nursing infrastructure, position school health suites as trusted public health hubs, and expand mobile, school-based vaccination clinics to eliminate socioeconomic barriers to access. Furthermore, I advocate for closing non-medical exemption loopholes for school enrollment and implementing standardized, mandatory immunization education for parents seeking exemptions. By leveraging the trusted, everyday relationships between school nurses, local pediatricians, and families, we can rebuild community trust, restore herd immunity, and keep Pennsylvania’s classrooms safe and open.

KEYWORDS: measles immunization and vaccination, coverage trends, Public health interventions, nonmedical exemption policy legal studies

Q1 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 do need to restrict PFAS chemicals in consumer products. I would listen to the opinions of scientists and medical professionals on the impact of PFAS on our health, and to their recommendations on how to keep residents safe.

KEYWORDS: Restrict, medical, health

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 would work with medical professionals to educate the public on the importance of vaccines to everyone’s safety. The amount of distrust and outright disinformation regarding many issues which impact all of our health is disturbing.

To the extent possible, we should dedicate state resources, through our Health Department, to get experts trusted by various communities to get the correct information to these communities.

KEYWORDS: Medical professionals educate

Q1 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?

Pennsylvania should protect public health without imposing needless costs on families and small businesses. Targeted phase-outs of intentional PFAS in the product categories covered by HB 2145 make sense when the science shows clear pathways of exposure and viable substitutes. I would insist on:

Clear definitions limited to intentionally added PFAS (not unavoidable trace contamination). Realistic timelines so manufacturers can reformulate without sudden shortages or price spikes. Focus on high-risk products rather than sweeping industrial or essential-use bans that could harm jobs or critical applications. Coordination with federal EPA standards and neighboring states to avoid a confusing patchwork that hurts Pennsylvania competitiveness. Continued monitoring of drinking-water and environmental sources, which remain major exposure routes.

I will not support feel-good legislation that ignores economic reality or weak evidence. Nor will I ignore documented health risks to our kids and families. Decisions must be grounded in EPA assessments, peer-reviewed epidemiology, and practical alternatives—not politics. That is how we put the people of the 112th District first.

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?

Measles is highly contagious, and the two-dose MMR vaccine is highly effective (about 97% protection after two doses) with a strong safety record established over decades of use and monitoring. Declining kindergarten coverage below the roughly 95% threshold associated with community protection has contributed to outbreaks. At the same time, many parents have legitimate questions after years of eroded public trust in institutions. Dismissing those concerns or treating parents as the problem only deepens division. I would educate on the pro’s and con’s of taking a vaccine or not.

Q1 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?

Public health is one of my top priorities, and I’m a firm believer in putting people before corporations. Pennsylvania must have more oversight on the materials we sell to the public, and regulations should be tightened to restrict the usage of PFAS. Looking to peer-reviewed publications for studies about the effects of PFAS on the environment and human body, I will always vote to regulate harmful materials. PFAS cause an increased risk of cancer and negatively affect the immune system’s ability to fight infection; while the federal government is allowing dangerous lapses in oversight, Pennsylvania must do the right thing and regulate these dangerous chemicals.

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?

As the Trump Administration works to limit access to life-saving medical care, legislators in Harrisburg must do everything in their power to ensure Pennsylvanians have all of the tools they need to keep themselves and their community healthy. Vaccines have been proven to be safe, effective, and the best tool for fighting infectious diseases like measles. Even in a widespread outbreak, there have been no recorded cases of a vaccinated person contracting measles–access to this safety should be guaranteed and free for all of the state. Dropping below a vaccination rate of 95% means that Pennsylvania is losing its herd immunity status; we must work to immediately raise our rates to protect our sick, elderly, and newborn populations. At the state level, I promise to combat misinformation in concerned communities with state information campaigns and support bills like HB1828 which require insurance companies to cover vaccines at no additional cost.

Q1 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?

The EPA has published its findings and they show the various possible harms to humans and the environment caused by different PFAs. I have not spent a great amount of time going over the individual studies but I am also not a chemist.

I defer to those with greater knowledge than I and trust that the researchers conducting these studies have the best interests of the people in mind.

I believe it is the duty of elected officials to protect the health of their constituents and would absolutely support banning the chemicals that have been shown to be health risks.

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?

Many people have been misled and, often to their detriment, no longer trust Scientists and Doctors. In order to ensure we maintain a low risk of these infectious and horrible diseases, we really need to ensure the education of ‘why’ is there when talking about immunization.

The sentiment is often that, it doesn’t feel like a benefit to the individual to be immunized, because they can still become sick. Effective immunization efforts require we all agree to protect each other through this mass immunization, even if our individual risk of infection or complications from illness is low.

I support funding for education related to immunization and disease prevention, would provide money for programs to increase immunization across the state, and further provide for research in reducing the spread of novel diseases.

Q1 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 (and all other states/countries) should restrict PFAS in consumer products. The EPA provides resources to studies done that found a close association of PFAS with harmful health effects on humans like cancer, infertility, gestational hypertension, decreased immunity, developmental delays, etc.

In vitro and in vivo researches have found coorelations between PFAS exposure and oxidative stress effects in mammals and other vertebrates. According to a 2004 study by ChemRick Inc., the Dupont plant in Washington Works, West Virginia, which released large amounts of PFAO into the environment and water, found increased average PFAO blood concentration in the population near the plant compared to the national average. In another study a positve trend was seen for prostate and pancreatic cancer among workers in a Minnesota PFAO production plant. These observations led to the inference that there is an correlation between PFAO exposure and cancer.

KEYWORDS: PFAO, PFAS, cancer, forever chemicals,

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?

People’s concerns around vaccines are often based on misinformation or lack of education. Therefore public education and awarness on how vaccines work, why sometimes it may appear that they don’t work and transperancy around posible side effects will hopefully increase vaccination rates. Also, emphasising the importance of herd immunity to protect those who are not able get vaccinated due to other health conditions is important to communicate.

As a policy maker I would introduce, support, co-sponsor legislation that encourages vaccination and make access to health care affordable.

KEYWORDS: vaccine, measles, prevention, herd immunity

Q1 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?

Pennsylvania should take steps to restrict PFAs in consumer products. I would look to scientific experts in this field to weigh in on what those steps would best be, but believe strongly that we should protect Pennsylvanians from toxic substances.

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?

My district is majority people of color and given the history of the relationship with medical experimentation in this country, we know there are some big information gaps as well as some mistrust which negatively impacts some of my neighbors and constituents.

In addition to using my voice as a bully pulpit to advocate for their medical needs, I would also use my position to let them know that vaccines are safe and necessary. I also strongly support increasing community-based and home-based inoculation programs for common and necessary vaccine regimens including MMR, TDAP, and COVID vaccines. In Lancaster County, the proliferation of misinformation on the national level has led to decreased vaccination rates upon the plains communities who were previously being reached by community health workers who could vaccinate adults and children in those communities. I believe strongly that vaccines are most effective when they are available and encouraged by a trusted messenger.

One of our key tasks will be increasing access to vaccinations, bringing them all across the Commonwealth and creating programs that rebuild trust with communities rather than lecturing them or being condescending to them.

Q1 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.

Q1 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 take action to restrict the use of PFAS chemicals in consumer products. As policymakers, we have a responsibility to protect Pennsylvanians from harmful exposures while ensuring decisions are guided by sound science and practical implementation.

In making decisions about PFAS regulation, I would rely on the best available scientific evidence, including research from public health agencies, environmental scientists, toxicologists, and regulatory bodies regarding the health impacts of PFAS exposure. I would also consider data on exposure levels, environmental contamination, and the effectiveness of available alternatives.

KEYWORDS: Public Health; Environmental Protection; Evidence-Based Research

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?

As a policymaker, I believe it is essential to approach concerns about infectious diseases and vaccine safety with respect, empathy, and a commitment to sharing accurate, science-based information. Public trust is critical, and we need to engage communities through open conversations, accessible information, and partnerships with trusted local healthcare providers, schools, and community leaders.

At the same time, policymakers have a responsibility to protect public health and prevent the spread of serious and preventable diseases. I support policies that promote access to vaccines, strengthen public health education, and ensure families have the information and resources they need to make informed decisions. I also believe we must continue to listen to concerns, address misinformation with facts, and make sure communities understand the safety and effectiveness of recommended vaccines.

KEYWORDS: Education; Partnership; Communication

Q1 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 would use peer-reviewed publications and medical journals to determine how PFAS are affecting people and the best course of action to deal with this issue. I believe the use of PFAS should be restricted and studied until we fully understand their effects on people and our environment.

KEYWORDS: Peer-reviewed data and scientific study

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?

The decline in vaccinations is primarily due to the spread of misinformation. I would propose a public service outreach program to raise awareness regarding the truth about the safety of vaccines and how important it is for everyone to be vaccinated.

KEYWORDS: Education, outreach, truth

Q1 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?

Peer-reviewed studies cited by the EPA establish that exposure to PFAS can cause health risks, including kidney and testicular cancer, fertility troubles, and developmental delays. Protecting Pennsylvanians from these toxic chemicals is both a public health necessity and a moral duty, so I have been glad to see bills like HB 1261 and HB 2145 on the House floor, often with bipartisan support.

HB 1261 protected our brave first responders from PFAS found in firefighter equipment, and HB 2145, which targets the PFAS found in more everyday items, holds corporations accountable, as manufacturers under this bill must prove their products do not contain added PFAS. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection has detected PFAS across major Commonwealth water sources, so stopping contamination at the source is key, and we shouldn’t place the burden on consumers when it could be handled at the manufacturing level.

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?

As an elected official who represents my entire district, it’s important for me to listen to the communities concerned about vaccine safety, but it’s equally important to acknowledge and speak on the facts. Vaccines, tested and approved by medical professionals, protect individuals by preparing and training our immune systems, and they protect the entire community by helping us build herd immunity to dangerous diseases as a society.

We are seeing more anti-vaccine rhetoric from public figures nowadays that can cause panic, but that rhetoric is based on misinformation and meant to sow distrust in the public health system. I do trust our medical community when they tell us vaccines have been properly tested and approved, and I would support legislation that helps keep Pennsylvanians safe from infectious disease outbreaks, such as investments in public health access and infectious disease research.

Q1 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 that we should restrict the use of PFAS chemicals and I am a co-sponsor of HB 2145. I rely on the analysis of trusted environmental groups like Penn Environment and Food and Water Watch to inform my decision.

KEYWORDS: Yes trusted advisors

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 previous worked with a union representing healthcare workers who had similar concerns during COVID. The key is using trusted messengers to reach people where they are at to deal with concerns about vaccine safety. If you do that, you can address the concerns that people have.

KEYWORDS: trusted messengers

Q1 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 non-essential uses of PFAS in consumer products to protect public health while preserving critical applications where no safe alternatives yet exist. My position is supported by epidemiological studies showing these persistent “forever chemicals” bioaccumulate in human tissue and water supplies, toxicological research linking exposure to increased risks of kidney cancer, thyroid dysfunction, and immune suppression, and environmental sampling demonstrating widespread watershed contamination across the Commonwealth. This evidence is drawn from peer-reviewed studies by the U.S. EPA and the CDC’s Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), along with water testing data from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Geological Survey.

KEYWORDS: Studies, Bioaccumulation, water contamination

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?

To address declining vaccination rates and local outbreaks, policymakers must lead with empathetic listening and trust-building rather than top-down messaging. Engaging communities effectively requires partnering with trusted local leaders, pediatricians, and community health workers who can address specific concerns about safety and personal risk through open, non-judgmental dialog. To restore public confidence and protect public health, I support policies that expand access to mobile vaccination clinics, improve public health data transparency regarding vaccine safety and outbreak monitoring, and ensure parents receive clear, evidence-based education from pediatric experts. I support maintaining strong state immunization requirements for school entry while preserving clear, standard exemption processes, ensuring our communities sustain the high coverage needed to protect vulnerable individuals who cannot be vaccinated.

Q1 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?

Pennsylvania should take a science-based approach to restricting PFAS in consumer products where safer alternatives exist. These “forever chemicals” pose real long-term risks to public health and our environment.

As a corporate turnaround executive, I’ve seen how companies can innovate when given clear standards and timelines. I would support targeted restrictions on non-essential uses while protecting critical applications in defense, healthcare, and manufacturing. Decisions should be guided by peer-reviewed science, risk assessments from agencies like the EPA and PA DEP, and input from affected industries and communities. We must protect families without unnecessarily harming jobs or innovation in Pennsylvania.

KEYWORDS: PFAS

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?

Declining measles vaccination rates reflect a breakdown in public trust. As a 30-year Army veteran who received over 50 vaccinations — including some containing thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative — I understand both the value of vaccines and why many parents have concerns.

The 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act created a moral hazard by granting manufacturers near-total liability protection. This reduced accountability and contributed to skepticism. We should reform the Act to restore proper incentives, increase transparency around ingredients and adverse events, and emphasize informed consent over mandates.

Rebuilding trust requires honesty about both the benefits and limitations of the current system.

KEYWORDS: Vaccine accountability, thimerosal, informed consent, public trust

Q1 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?

This bill is not ready for prime time. First the amount of PFAS that is considered dangerous in so minute it can almost not be measured. We need to begin with the big offenders and get our arms around the issue. Instead we are trying to make it a fund raiser by going after the little guys.

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 in medical freedom. I also believe it is the responsibility of a family to protect others if a family member becomes infected