For related articles and more information, please visit OCA’s Politics and Democracy page and our Environment and Climate Resource Center page.
The Pennsylvania Legislature recently adopted Act 13 of 2012 (House Bill 1950) to accelerate the extraction of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale deposit underlying much of Pennsylvania.

Act 13 is but one of many efforts by the State to preempt people and their communities from making critical decisions for themselves – including decisions on fracking – and it’s why communities across Pennsylvania are now joining forces to fundamentally change how, and perhaps more importantly, for whom, our structures of law and government work. 

The legislature’s latest action to aid the gas corporations should come as no surprise.  It’s part of a pattern that’s emerged over the years in which the legislature and State government work hand in hand to place the interests of corporations over and above our communities.

We shouldn’t be surprised either that the new bill uses state preemptive powers to strip people – and their local governments – of the authority to ban or regulate natural gas extraction.  Or further, that it empowers the state Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to override local ordinances that run counter to state laws that facilitate gas extraction.

Act 13 also creates so-called “impact fees” – a cynical attempt to equate the health, safety, and welfare of our communities with the resurfacing of roads.

Act 13 punctuates the State’s priority to remove as much power as possible from those who are most impacted by gas extraction.

Prior to its passage, the State had already all but eviscerated local control – allowing municipalities to use their zoning powers only to regulate the placement of surface well pads.  Given that horizontal gas drilling enables corporations to reach gas deposits under protected zones in the municipality, describing well-pad zoning as a form of “local control” was a bad joke.  Even “legal” zoning measures didn’t stop gas corporations from suing municipalities – such as South Fayette and Cecil Townships  – when the corporations felt that even minimal zoning restrictions would interfere with their bottom line.