Radio Smart Talk for Monday, October 10:
Last week, Gov. Tom Corbett outlined details of his Marcellus Shale natural gas policy. The plan includes an impact fee on drillers, new regulations and penalties for violators.
The highlight of the plan is the impact fee. Under the governor's proposal, counties where wells are located, can impose an impact fee of up to $40,000 on each well in the first year, declining to a maximum of $10,000 in the tenth year. The fee is estimated to collect $120 million in the first year and $195 million by the sixth year. Three-quarters of the money raised would go to counties and local communities for road and bridge repairs, social services, affordable housing projects, emergency response and public water projects.
Scott Detrow, witf's StateImpact Pennsylvania reporter, who covers energy and environmental issues, will join us on Monday's program to discuss the governor's plan.
What do you think about Gov. Corbett's Marcellus Shale proposal?
Listen to the program:
comments
Every other State that has gas wells has an extraction tax ---- which helps to fund the State operating budget, including allocations to the counties most in need.
Corbett's so-called 'reluctance' to tax the drillers is nothing more than obeisance to his contributors.... in short, Corbett is a paid courtesan to the gas corporations.
Giving the counties the ability to collect some user fees sounds like it's a another way to tax the drilling---------------but ignores the 'Common' in Commonwealth: all of PA is being affected by the drilling----all of PA needs to be financially involved in the process.
But even more importantly, Corbett's administration needs to do an Environmental Impact Study to ascertain whether this drilling is a threat to current and future Pennsylvanians.
NO EIS STUDY HAS BEEN DONE IN PA.
taxing (or placing a fee) on each unit a certain percentage at the state level. This is both fair and efficient (although sometimes difficult to implement)
Counties don't have the resources to do this.
he also likens taxes to rape. WITF should make this clear that you understand that Norquist uses this type of violent rhetoric instead of discussing ideas in a balanced manner.
Why does he do this?
He appears to be a blind supporter of Norquist and appeared to dismiss Jan Jarret's concerns off hand.
It was subtle, but the giggle and the which one's comment were telling and dissapointing.
The State can collect the taxes much more efficiently than a bunch of counties; the fee should be consistent across the State; and Counties should not be in the practice of setting rates and then collecting them for the State.
How about this: The State sets a single county fee structure and makes it constant across all counties and then collects it for the counties. It would then become a consistent county fee with an efficient collector.
Finally, why not just make it a simple equivalent percentage rate on production rather than a nonsensical sliding scale per well -- but still make it a County tax. Take the heat from Grover, after all you're a Governor now!
Do the trucks that get to these counties get air dropped in?
A well near a county border may affect the neighboring county more than the on it is in.
Alaska and Texas have no income tax. Gov. Palin raised the extraction tax. They actually pay you to live there.
Who is paying AK and TX at the gas pump?
Stop complaining because this Gov. does not care about you unless you are a big business lining his pocket.
I challenge the Gov. to prove me wrong.
RSS feed for comments to this post