Cornerstone Care, a non-profit community health clinic providing a full-range of primary and preventative health, dental and mental care was forced to close their location in the Burgettstown area last week after a third incident requiring evacuation of the employees. The evacuations came after strong odors, described as similar to the smell of nail polish remover were reported, causing employees to become ill; there were also indications of methane in the clinic’s water supply. The majority of the clinic will remain closed indefinitely; dental services will still be provided in the downstairs portion of the facility, where the odors have not been reported.

I’m disturbed about the closure of Cornerstone Care, but I’m even more disturbed and infuriated at the way the closure could have possibly been prevented, and what this tells us about the failure of the Department of Environmental Protection to do its job.

The first evacuation came on March 28. When local fire departments and HAZMAT units were unable to find the source of the odors, Cornerstone officials contacted the state Department of Environmental Protection’s southwest regional office. They referred Cornerstone to the DEP Oil and Gas Unit, which is based out of Harrisburg.

Why the Oil and Gas Unit? It turns out that several Marcellus Shale wells are nearby, including an active site about half a mile away from the clinic, and there is a sizable natural gas compressor site being constructed less than a mile from the clinic.

Let’s stop right here for a minute, because I know the response forming in many peoples’ minds, and I want to address it right here and now. First, I am in no way saying that oil and gas activity caused the problems at Cornerstone Care. I am not a scientist, and although I know a lot more than I did a few years ago about the drilling process, I don’t pretend to be one. Second, I am not trying to whip people into a frenzy to oppose the natural gas drilling. In fact, let’s remember it was the Regional DEP office that brought the Oil and Gas Unit into the discussion in the first place. In fact, one of the biggest arguments made in favor of Act 13, which took away local zoning rights (only for oil and gas operations) from municipalities was that the state, through the DEP, was by far the most competent and qualified to handle concerns.

So we have a system where the DEP Oil and Gas Unit is the only group who can investigate these types of problems, and although I cannot say with certainty the problems at Cornerstone are related to drilling, no one can say with certainty that they are not caused by drilling. You would think the Oil and Gas Unit would be quick to respond, if for no other reason to dispel any concerns right away, especially for a high-profile public health facility situated in the dead center of the Marcellus Shale boom.

So how can the DEP Oil and Gas Unit justify not returning phone calls from Cornerstone for over two weeks after the first evacuation? I was in a meeting with Cornerstone officials and DEP staff two days before the final evacuation and closure of the clinic, and it was confirmed that the Oil and Gas Unit never responded. It was also revealed that the company doing the drilling nearby was contacted and didn’t respond for over two weeks. We were told if there was one more incident, the clinic would have to close, and that’s exactly what happened two days later.

Because of the media attention surrounding the closure, the DEP announced they are finally conducting air quality tests in the facility. Ironically, the tests won’t be completed for two to three weeks, which means they could have theoretically been completed before the closure if the DEP had responded to the situation before it got out of hand.

Adding to the uncertainty is a statement made by a DEP spokesman that the DEP found no connection of the problems to the drilling activity; how could anyone possibly be able to make such a statement without doing proper investigation and testing? Similarly, a spokesman for the drilling company said the company knew about the odor before they began drilling and that no odors are coming from their drilling site. I don’t know about you, but I’m not comfortable just blindly accepting the unsubstantiated claim of a public relations official on the gas industry payroll without any documented evidence to support their denial of involvement.

When problems like this occur, I want an independent, objective, scientific investigation. I want the openness and transparency and accountability we always hear about but rarely see. We’ve been told by the Corbett administration and the gas industry that the DEP are the only ones qualified to perform those tasks, but in this instance they completely and totally dropped the ball.

The DEP’s failure to respond to quickly and properly respond to a clear problem with far-reaching implications for the community is simply inexcusable. After the regional DEP office referred Cornerstone to the Oil and Gas Unit, not returning a phone call for over two weeks seriously damages their credibility and diminishes the public trust at a time when both are on shaky ground to begin with. And the failure of the drilling company to respond to Cornerstone’s calls doesn’t seem to jive with the “good neighbor” rhetoric we are pounded with from every angle.

This is not an attempt to “attack” natural gas drilling, as some will no doubt claim. There are plenty of people out there who are working hard every day to do it responsibly, and I’m not trying to take away the economic benefits from those people, many of whom are my constituents. You can’t just “pick a side” because this is simply not an issue with two “sides”; it’s complicated and nuanced.

My job is to make sure state government is doing its job, and to make sure my constituents are fairly and properly represented. And when one side of state agency shifts responsibility to another state agency who fails to respond, and the result is people getting sick, losing a needed healthcare resource and jobs leaving my district, I feel compelled to speak up and demand the accountability and transparency we have been promised but has failed to materialize.

The public deserves to know everything about what is being done, or apparently not done, to ensure their safety. The odors in the building aren’t the only thing that smells funny here.

This doesn’t happen very often, so I feel compelled to share it here. I have been endorsed by a group of Republican elected officials for the write-in for the Republican nomination for State Representative in Tuesday’s Primary Election. Chief among the endorsers is Greg DeLuca, a Republican Township Supervisor from Hanover Township, Beaver County, who also happened to be my opponent in the 2010 campaign. I feel this letter underscores that we can all work together to cross party lines when it’s really important, and this letter validates how we’ve done just that.

If you are a Republican voter, please consider writing me in for “Representative in the General Assembly” on Tuesday, April 24. There is no other Republican filed, and I am running unopposed on the Democratic ballot. This may seem redundant, but there has been a whole lot going on behind the scenes over the past couple of months and I wanted to make sure people knew that locally we can all work together when the need arises.

Below the letter you will find info on how to do the write-in, a list of municipalities in the 46th District, and instructions on how to find your polling place. Thank you for your consideration, and don’t forget to vote on Tuesday, April 24!

Republican Endorsement Letter of Jesse White

If you live in one of these communities, you live in the 46th District:

WASHINGTON COUNTY:

• Buffalo Township
• Burgettstown Borough
• Canton Township
• Cecil Township
• Chartiers Township
• Cross Creek Township
• Green Hills Borough
• Hanover Township
• Hopewell Township
• Independence Township
• Jefferson Township
• McDonald Borough
• Midway Borough
• Mount Pleasant Township
• Robinson Township
• Smith Township
• South Franklin Township
• West Middletown Borough

ALLEGHENY COUNTY

• McDonald Borough
• Oakdale Borough
• South Fayette Township (Wards 7 & 12)

BEAVER COUNTY

• Frankfort Springs Borough
• Hanover Township

You can find out where your specific polling place is by visiting the PA Votes website. The polls are open from 7:00 AM – 8:00 PM on Tuesday, April 24. See you there!

Last week, the State House of Representatives unanimously passed House Bill 2137, which imposes a statewide moratorium on all court-ordered property tax reassessments. If this sounds somewhat familiar to you, it’s because the House passed a nearly identical bill, House Bill 1696, last June. After inexplicably being amended in the State Senate, the bill was deemed unconstitutional and earned Governor Corbett’s first and only veto.

But a whole lot has happened since last June, and now it appears both the public and the politicians are beginning to understand why a temporary moratorium on court-ordered reassessments is so important. The high-profile reassessment values imposed in Allegheny County were so outrageous, Allegheny County Executive Rich Fitzgerald was willing to be thrown in jail to avoid certifying them for 2012. In Washington County, the County Commissioners have appealed the court-ordered reassessment (forced by a lawsuit by McGuffey and Washington School Districts) all the way to the state’s Commonwealth Court. Why are reassessments such a big deal all of a sudden?

Despite the claims of the people behind these lawsuits, this is a rare instance of elected officials at the county and state level working across party lines to protect taxpayers from property tax increases. I’ve been saying it for nearly three years; now I have solid evidence to back up my theories.

As part of the negotiations to get the moratorium bill passed last June, I also managed to quietly get two resolutions passed at the same time. House Resolutions 343 and 344, sponsored by me and Rep. Brandon Neuman, established task forces designed to really examine the problems with the reassessment process and examine ways to get the mess untangled once and for all.

The Task Forces reviewed the reassessment processes in different counties within Pennsylvania and existing standards in other states, published by the International Association of Assessing Officers.  We made it a point to include all the stakeholders involved in the reassessment process, including the PA School Boards Association, County Commissioners Association, Assessors’ Association of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania State Tax Equalization Board (STEB), and the PA Department of Revenue. After months of daylong meetings in Harrisburg, the Task Forces released their reports this week, and the results confirmed what many of us suspected all along.

The reassessment process was never designed as a mechanism to raise tax revenue; it was designed to serve as a way to adjust property values based on sales and other factors to make sure properties were fairly and equally taxed over the years. There are “anti-windfall” provisions built in, which were supposed to make sure millage rates went down as property values increased, but there are no realistic enforcement mechanisms to prevent a school district (or a county or a municipality) from reaping huge property tax increases as a result of a reassessment.

School districts disagree with this premise, but are unable to explain why they are spending tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars in legal fees to force a reassessment they aren’t supposed to profit from. Their claims don’t pass the smell test; they have hijacked the reassessment process in an attempt to exploit a loophole and increase our property taxes, then hiding behind state law. It’s despicable, and until we pass legislation to close the loophole, we cannot allow these court-ordered reassessment lawsuits to continue.

The Task Force reports go much deeper, laying out a series of technical changes that may seem boring and inconsequential but are actually crucially important.

It became clear in our meetings that the problems with the current system create a “garbage in/garbage out” scenario, where no matter how well-intentioned a county may be, there is just no way to conduct a truly fair and accurate reassessment under current law. We also detailed ways to lower the cost and increase the accuracy of the reassessment process through implementing real-time uniformity in reporting property sales, creating standard data entry codes, providing model contracting standards for counties and making dramatic but necessary changes to the State Tax Equalization Board, a group you’ve probably never heard of but plays a huge role in how reassessments are conducted.

I’ll be the first to admit this is about as nerdy as it gets, even for government work. But we took our task seriously, which meant diving into details most people would rather gouge their eyeballs out than deal with in any detail. We identified lots of problems, and a decent amount of solutions. The goal was to work towards “minimally invasive” solutions, approached requiring the least amount of legislation possible. On some areas there was nearly universal consensus, and we should be able to get those recommendations into law in a matter of months. Other areas require further work and review by policy makers, taking into account issues of constitutionality and legislative reality, but we are much closer to fixing the reassessment mess than we have ever been before.

All of our progress will be for naught, however, if the school districts and their attorneys are successful in forcing court-ordered reassessments on us before we have a chance to make these changes and close the loopholes. By restoring the reassessment process to its original intended use, we eliminate the ability to use reassessment as a weapon to dramatically increase property taxes, which should eliminate these ridiculous lawsuits being funded on both sides by taxpayers. But the school districts and their lawyers didn’t come all this way to stop now; expect to see lots of heightened and misleading rhetoric in the weeks and months to come as they try and fight the moratorium and our reform efforts with everything they’ve got.

I welcome the debate and refuse to run from the fight; it’s a fight worth winning for every property owner in Pennsylvania. And now that we’ve got the facts on our side, it’s a fight I know we can win.

Read the full reports of the Reassessment Reform Task Forces here.

During a recent floor debate in the House of Representatives on a contentious issue, I began discussing the bill with some colleagues, both Democrat and Republican.

As an elected official, I am often asked to serve on various Boards of Directors and Advisory Boards for different non-profits. Usually the commitment involves attending meetings when possible, providing strategic direction and assisting in fundraising and promoting awareness. One organization caught my interest and drove me to invest much more, and the results have been spectacular.

Last year, I was asked to serve on the advisory board of Big Brothers Big Sisters of Washington County; but instead of just serving on the board, I decided to actually become a Big Brother. It was one of the best decisions I have ever made.

I am actually the oldest of four children in my family, so I’ve been a big brother in the strictest sense of the word since I was fourteen months old. But the mission of Big Brothers Big Sisters is so important, I felt compelled to give the most valuable thing I have, which is my time.

When I first started my legal career, I did lots of cases in the local juvenile justice system. I saw children doing stupid things, and often-illegal things, knocking their lives off-track mainly because they lacked any real adult role model who cared enough to step in and keep them on the straight and narrow. Single parent families where the parent is off working create a huge void in a child’s life too often filled with bad behavior are also a huge problem, and it’s hard to blame a parent for going off to work in order to put food on the table.

I had a case once where a local 14 year-old boy was sent away to a juvenile detention center because he fell in with a bad crowd and did some stupid things that probably could have been prevented if someone had just paid attention to him. He went away as a punk, but came back six months later as a clean-cut young man with a brand new personality. When he shook my hand and called me ‘sir’ in the courtroom, I thought they had brought the wrong kid; the change was that dramatic. He was released from detention and sent home, where his mother worked at night, leaving only his older brothers, criminals in their own right, to take care of him. Two months later, he was arrested and sent away again, worse off than when he started. In retrospect, the kid never had a chance.

Experiences like the one I just described are why I’m proud to give my time to be a Big Brother. The program is simple; you get matched up with a Little and you get together about twice a month for three to five hours per outing. My match is ‘community based’, which means we go out into the community and do whatever we want; there are also ‘site-based’ visits, which take place at a central site.

I’m not going to talk about my Little specifically, because it’s not appropriate to do so publicly, but he’s a great kid. My job as an elected official allows me to do some pretty cool stuff, and it’s a privilege to share those experiences with a young man to show that if you work hard and stay focused in life, it does pay off in the end. I am very careful to keep my politics out of my Big-Little relationship, which makes it a great way for me to escape the crucible of public debate and just enjoy life once in a while. More importantly, I feel as though by investing my time and energy, I’m helping him have a better chance to succeed in life.

Big Brothers Big Sisters of Washington County is recruiting both Bigs and Littles (children ages 6-13), male and female, for their programs. If you or anyone you know would qualify, please visit www.bbbspgh.org or call 724-228-9191. There is an emphasis on safety and BBBS staff regularly monitors the status of each match.

There is no cost to participate in the program, but we do need help in raising money for the organization. This Sunday, March 18, I will have a team in the annual Bowl for Kids’ Sake event at West Pike Bowl, and we’re looking for sponsors and donations; every little amount helps and is totally tax-deductible. If you are interested in helping make a difference in the lives of local kids, make a donation by visiting http://www.bbbspittsburgh.kintera.org/jwhite or calling 724-743-4444.

Help me make a difference through Big Brothers Big Sisters. If your experience is anything like mine has been, you’ll be unbelievably glad you did.

Click Here to Donate

I only do newsletters about once every 18 months because I’m mindful of staying below budget when it comes to public money (and not everyone is online to get info), but it is important to let people know what is going on. If you would like future newsletters sent via email to lower printing costs, please click here.

Recently, the state House and Senate passed House Bill 1950, the long-awaited law designed to deal with Marcellus Shale natural gas drilling in Pennsylvania. It has also been signed into law by Gov. Tom Corbett. I voted “no” on this legislation and strongly argued against its passage during floor debate in the House of Representatives. To put it bluntly, House Bill 1950 is a terrible law for the people of Pennsylvania.

Here are just a few of the reasons why:

1. It’s a tax.

I have always maintained that the proper approach was to pass a true impact fee to address real local impacts of natural gas drilling. An impact fee would stay primarily in the areas where the industry is operating. House Bill 1950, despite whatever fancy name you want to give it, is actually a straight tax. The revenue is variable based on production, and the money is being sent all over the state, and to some other places it probably shouldn’t be going, which leads us to …

2. Industry giveaways.

This bill is loaded with blatant giveaways for the natural gas industry. There’s money for “Housing Affordability Programs,” which means we will be paying for temporary housing for workers from out of state who will no longer be staying in our hotels. There are subsidies for natural gas vehicle programs the industry apparently couldn’t afford to do without a government handout. And there is a massive direct cash giveaway intended to go to the Shell Oil Corp., which had a profit of more than $20 billion in 2010.

If you were upset about the potential funding of the Arlen Specter Library (which Corbett also approved), you have to be losing your mind over a deal to subsidize a major foreign oil company with your tax dollars.

3. No local control.

The language in House Bill 1950 is plain and simple. It says that all local ordinances are superseded and replaced by statewide standards for important issues such as setbacks, noise and lighting control, fencing around impoundments and location of compressor stations.

These statewide standards are horrifically weak, and the law says that local governments cannot pass any law that would make them stronger or in any other way impedes the development of oil and gas operations, which could mean almost anything.

If anyone out there tries to tell you that municipalities can still have flexibility to pass reasonable ordinances to deal with issues specific to individual towns, ask them for specific examples. And if you get any, let me know, because I haven’t been able to come up with any yet. House Bill 1950 takes control from your elected officials and gives it to the Public Utility Commission, a group of people appointed by Corbett and not elected by anyone. What ever happened to democracy?

4. It wasn’t a compromise.

Supporters of House Bill 1950 will tell you the law is a compromise. The only compromise could have been between the lobbyists for the natural gas industry and the people who agreed with them already, because they were the only ones in the room negotiating this 174-page bill, which was drafted in secret and almost immediately put up for a vote. House Bill 1950 wasn’t a compromise; it was a backroom deal made by a small group of people whose primary concern was the profit margin for the energy industry.

5. Inadequate protection for leaseholders.

House Bill 1950 is not a good bill for natural gas leaseholders. Despite claims that the tax cannot be passed onto leaseholders, I’m not convinced that some companies won’t try to do just that. After all, they’re the ones who basically wrote the bill.

Additionally, most people who signed leases did so under the assumption that they had certain protections under the law, but now the law has been changed from underneath them. When a company wants to put an impoundment or compressor station where it’s best for its profit margin, there will be virtually no way to stop it.

6. Doesn’t help state jobs.

House Bill 1950 does nothing to promote job creation for Pennsylvania workers; in fact, it seems to be designed to allow the continued practice of an out-of-state workforce. There are no funds set aside for worker training, no tax credits for hiring Pennsylvania workers and no requirements for ensuring workers on the drill sites are drug-tested or even United States citizens. To ignore these issues and then call House Bill 1950 a “jobs bill’ would be laughable if the consequences weren’t so dire.

For all the reasons stated above and many more, I voted “no” on House Bill 1950. I believe it to be a bad bill that fails to address crucial needs for our region at the expense of the energy industry. Pennsylvania had a chance to prove that we can have the economic benefits of natural gas drilling while demonstrating a commitment to protecting our communities and encouraging local job creation, but House Bill 1950 is clear and unfortunate proof that we failed spectacularly.

Here is a video of my floor speech during the debate on HB 1950:

FEBRUARY 14, 2012 – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Jesse White Files Nominating Petitions to Seek 4th Term

State Representative Jesse White (D-Cecil) filed nominating petitions in Harrisburg today and is formally announcing his intention to seek re-election in the 46^th Legislative District, which he has represented since 2006.

“I ran for office because I had a passion to help real people,” said White. “I am probably more passionate than ever, and now I have some real experience to help me turn that energy into results. Even if my constituents may not always agree with the message, I believe they appreciate having a clear voice representing them in Harrisburg.” This year, White was voted Vice-Chairman of the Southwest Delegation of the Democratic Caucus and appointed Chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Family Law. He also serves on the Judiciary, Labor and Industry, Consumer Affairs and Aging and Older Adult Services Committees.

White cites his work with local communities on Marcellus Shale natural gas development as a major accomplishment. In 2010, White joined leaders from eighteen municipalities to form a Marcellus Municipal Co-op to address the needs of local communities in a positive and pro-active way, holding workshops and town hall meetings to find ways to promote the economic benefits of the natural gas industry while offering reasonable protections for the people of Pennsylvania. “Our goal was to raise awareness and get people talking about the important issues, and I believe we are doing exactly that,” White said. “Marcellus Shale is a once-in-a-generation economic opportunity, but with that opportunity comes great responsibility, and I am please to be working with so many dedicated people in a truly non-partisan way to ask the tough questions and be a voice for the people of our region.”

White has also become a leader on property tax reassessment reform, pushing for a statewide moratorium on court-ordered reassessments to prevent tax increases in places like Washington and Allegheny Counties. White is currently serving on a joint task force, created by legislation he wrote in 2011, to address long-term reassessment reform in Harrisburg. He pointed to his training and experience as a licensed attorney to help navigate through the complicated issue. “One of the main challenges of reassessment reform is simply getting people to realize the roots of the problem,” White said. “The challenge of reforming a system in mid-stream being implemented differently in 67 different counties is staggering, but the stakes are too high for Pennsylvanians struggling with overwhelming property taxes to stop fighting for reform.”

White has been at the forefront of social media in government, citing daily interaction with a network of over 5,000 friends on Facebook. “Social media is revolutionizing the way we govern,” White noted. “My Facebook page is like a never-ending Town Hall meeting where my constituents can discuss and debate issues in real-time while I’m on the floor of the House of Representatives. Social media is instantaneous, unfiltered and free, which are three things taxpayers should be happy about.” White’s page can be accessed at www.facebook.com/jessewhite46 and he can be followed on Twitter at www.twitter.com/jessewhite46.

The original plan of the 2011 Legislative Redistricting Commission had the 46^th legislative district shifted dramatically into Allegheny County; however, the recent order by the State Supreme Court which struck down the proposed redistricting as unconstitutional meant the lines of the district will likely remain unchanged through the 2012 election. “The redistricting debacle has created massive amounts of confusion for constituents, which is a shame,” White said. “I didn’t want to leave so many people I have grown to know so well over the past five years, but I had basically no control over the situation. I just want to get this distraction over with and focus on governing.”

White’s other legislative priorities include comprehensive municipal authority reform (HB 219, 220, 221 and 222), “Buy American” legislation (HB 2178) to ensure Pennsylvania tax dollars are used to purchase products and materials made in America and an Animal Adoption Tax Credit, which would provide a $300 tax credit for Pennsylvanians who adopt a dog or cat from a shelter; this proposal (HB 1765) is the first of its kind in the nation. White is a noted defender of animal rights; his dogs, Abigail and Delano have become minor celebrities and have their own Facebook page dedicated to animal rights issues (www.facebook.com/abigailanddelano).

Jesse White is 33 years old and resides in Cecil Township, where he served as a Township Supervisor and Township Auditor. He is a graduate of Washington and Jefferson College and Duquesne University Law School. Jesse is a member of the National Rifle Association, McDonald Sportsmen Association, Chartiers Lodge No. 297 of F & A.M, Loyal Order of Moose Lodge No. 22, the Alpine Lodge No. 9, Muse Independent Italian Club, Saint Mary’s Roman Catholic Church in Cecil and MENSA. He also serves on the Board of Directors of the advisory Board of the Meadowcroft Rockshelter and Museum of Natural Life, the Big Brothers Big Sisters of Washington County Advisory Board, where he also volunteers as a Big Brother, and the Washington County Energy Partners Advisory Board.

For more information, visit www.supportjesse.com.

Each year since 1982 every person who has been a resident of Alaska for the previous year and indicates an intention to remain gets a Permanent Fund Dividend check from the state. Everyone receives an equal share of the appropriation from the earnings of the Alaska Permanent Fund with parents responsible for the checks of their children.

With the development of the natural gas industry in Pennsylvania, people have asked me whether we can do something similar with proceeds from the Marcellus Shale. I did some research, and here is what I found:

Since the Trans Alaska Pipeline became operational in 1977, approximately 16.6 billion barrels of oil have flowed from Alaska to the west coast of the continental United States. As of December 2009, Alaska’s extractable oil reserve is estimated at more than 5 billion barrels of crude oil.

Additionally, natural gas reserves are estimated at more than 35 trillion cubic feet.

By the late 1970s, Alaskans recognized that, eventually, the state’s oil wells would run dry. True to their founders’ belief—that resources belonging to the state should be used to benefit Alaskans—the people wanted to ensure that future generations of Alaskans continued to benefit from the exploitation of its reserves, even after the wells ran dry.

Thus, the idea of the Permanent Fund was born.

The fund received its first deposit of constitutionally dedicated oil revenue of $734,000 in 1977. Under the Alaska Constitution, at least 25 percent of all mineral and oil revenues must be placed in the fund. The principal of the fund is used for income-producing investments, and cannot be spent unless approval to do so is given by a vote of the people of Alaska.

The Legislature determined that the best use of the fund was as an investment account. The Legislature also created a program called the Permanent Fund Dividend Program. Through this program, all Alaskans would share directly in the oil wealth given to the state of Alaska. The principal is the permanent part of the Permanent fund; it can be invested, but it can never be spent without a vote by the people of Alaska.

The principal of the fund comes from four sources: dedicated oil revenues, additional funds deposited by special legislative appropriation, income from the fund’s reserve that the Legislature transfers to principal for inflation proofing, and unrealized gains or losses, which are dependent on the market volatility on the value of the investments.

The income of the Alaska Permanent Fund is the money received from the investment of the principal and from the reinvestment of undistributed earnings.  Income can be spent by the legislature or reinvested. In 1998, for the first time ever, the Fund earnings from investments exceeded the state oil revenues as the Fund reached $25 billion.

Alaska leases state-owned land to private firms who drill for an extract from the state-owned land. As part of their lease agreements, these firms must give Alaska a royalty fee which is 12.5 percent of the oil extracted by volume.

Alaska can either sell the oil itself or the private company can sell it and Alaska receives a monetary share that is determined utilizing net-back pricing based upon the selling price of oil on the west coast of the lower 48 states.

Income earned from the fund’s investments is accounted for in the earnings reserve account per statute.

On June 30 of each year, the Legislature appropriates funds from the account for dividends, inflation proofing and whatever other lawful purpose the Legislature may designate. All income in the earnings reserve is available for appropriation.

The PFD program has become deeply ingrained in the culture of Alaska. From 1982 through 2008, the Fund has paid out about $16.7 billion to Alaskans. In some areas in rural Alaska, the PFD now directly accounts for more than 10 percent of personal income.

While the Permanent Fund has been quite successful in Alaska, it is may be too early to tell whether it would work in Pennsylvania.  One of the primary reasons that the PFD works so well in Alaska is that the state’s natural resources are vast and the state’s population is small.

While Pennsylvania also has vast natural resources, Pennsylvania’s population may be too big to allow any sort of real impact to be felt by individual Pennsylvanians.

By way of example, 628,499 people received a share of the Alaska Fund in 2009, for a total of $820,500,000 or $1305.00 each. Almost 13 million people live in Pennsylvania. Even if Pennsylvania were to be able to distribute the same dollar amount as Alaska—$820,500,000, (which it couldn’t for a number of years of time because it takes a significant period of time to grow any fund to that level)— each of Pennsylvania’s 12,734,905 people would receive $64.43.

In the fund’s early years, such as 1983, before the fund had a chance to grow, each of Alaska’s approximately 401,851 citizens received $331.29 or an estimated total of $133,129,217.79.

Today, each Pennsylvanian would receive the sum of about $10.45.

So is it legally possible to do a system like Alaska? Perhaps. Is it practical for Pennsylvania? Probably not.