|
|
  |
Welcome to www.dante7.com. The personal web site of Dante Picciano and friends.
Don't Drink the Water: Clean Coal's Downside
Posted - February 01, 2008 Coal Ash Dumping Tied to Cancer Clusters Suemedha Sood  Photo Credit: iStockphoto Merle Wertman, now 62, was diagnosed with Polycythemia Vera five years ago. He had no idea what Polycythemia Vera was. That isn't surprising, considering less than one in 100,000 Americans a year are diagnosed with the extremely rare form of bone marrow cancer, that causes an abnormal increase in blood cells. What is surprising is that Wertman is one of 131 people near his hometown of Tamaqua, Penn., now battling this rare cancer. In eastern Pennsylvania's Carbon, Luzerne, and Schuylkill counties, that surround the Tamaqua borough, the rate of the rare blood cancer is 4.5 times the national rate, according to data from the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), a federal public health agency of the Dept. of Health and Human Services. The cancer "cluster" (shown on the map below) follows along Ben Titus Road, next to the Big Gorilla coal combustion waste dump of the Northeastern Power Co. The area is also home to the Superfund sites McAdoo Associates, Air Product & Chemicals Inc., Expert Management Inc. and ICI Americas Inc. "They have no idea what it comes from. Nobody knows," said Wertman. "Is it the environment, is it the water? No one knows." A retired prison guard, Wertman has lived in and around Tamaqua his entire life. He gets angry when he thinks about the blood cancer rate in his hometown and the lack of accountability for its causes. "The Department of Health in Pennsylvania sucks," he said. "[They] say there's nothing wrong with the environment around here…It's bullshit, back and forth."
While multiple environmental factors could well be at play, much evidence points to the waste produced by coal-fired energy plants. "Although the ATSDR did not report a specific link between polycythemia vera and fly ash [a type of coal ash]," said Dante Picciano, a local scientist and environmentalist active on the issue of coal ash dumping, "we believe that the relationship between the two should be at the top of the list for any investigations into the specific cause of the rare cancer." This is also of concern to Dr. Paul Roda, an oncologist and hematologist who is now treating roughly one-third of the PV patients in the area. "In my mind," he said, "it's certainly a cluster. You don't see that many cases in a very small area—particularly a very low population area." Roda did point out that another cause could be the materials dumped at the nearby McAdoo superfund site. In the 1970s, toxic chemicals were dumped down a mine ventilation shaft, which led to the Environmental Protection Agency classifying it as a superfund site. "We haven't done enough studies to know if this is due to coal ash or the material that was dumped down the site." Roda said. In many areas, where residents get their water from wells, those toxins dissolve directly into the drinking water. Coal combustion waste, or coal ash, is the solid waste byproduct created when coal is burned. One million railroad cars could be filled with the amount of coal ash produced from coal combustion in the United States each year. When coal combustion waste is disposed in a dump site—usually a mine, landfill, waste pond or out in the open in a sand-and-gravel pit—the toxins from the ash can leach into the groundwater and surface water, often migrating to the drinking water. In many areas, where residents get their water from wells, those toxins dissolve directly into the drinking water. According to the Environmental Protection Agency's own research, coal ash dumping can lead to higher rates of cancer, developmental problems in children and adverse effects in women of child-bearing age. Despite the fact that coal ash contains mercury, lead, arsenic, chromium, cadmium, selenium, beryllium, and other toxic metals, the EPA has yet to categorize coal ash as hazardous waste. In addition, coal ash has been found to be up to 100 times more radioactive than nuclear waste, due to the concentrations of uranium and thorium that increase 10-fold after coal is burned. But Northeastern Power Co. Plant Manager Edward Missal says he isn't aware of any links between coal ash dumping and cancer. "The EPA has taken a look at that and pretty much ruled that out as far as what I'm under the understanding of," he said. The solid waste side of coal is being overlooked as environmentalists focus their attention on air pollution and as government agencies and coal companies push "clean" coal technologies. "Cleaner" coal technologies actually produce more toxic coal ash in the resulting solid wase than "dirty" coal technologies, says Jeff Stant of the Clean Air Task Force. These technologies pulverize low-grade fuels in a way that releases fewer pollutants into the air. But those pollutants have to go somewhere, and they end up as ash. Stant was a contributing author for a recently released report investigating 15 mine disposal sites in Pennsylvania, most of which are dumping sites for ash from Fluidized Bed Combustion (FBC), a "clean" coal technology. The study...found coal ash to be contaminating the groundwater and surface water at levels exceeding federal drinking water standards by 30 to 40 times. The study, entitled "Impacts on Water Quality from Placement of Coal Combustion Waste in Pennsylvania Coal Mines," found coal ash to be contaminating the groundwater and surface water at levels exceeding federal drinking water standards by 30 to 40 times. "Clean" FBC plants produce at least five times more coal ash by volume than standard plants do. These plants inject limestone into the burn chamber to capture more emissions and therefore release fewer emissions-thus the misnomer, "clean." But, the limestone leaves behind a burned residual, which ends up in the ash. The bigger problem is that "clean" plants burn more waste-coal than actual coal. Waste-coal consists of the impurities removed from coal in addition to some coal itself, and it contains an ash content that's three times higher than regular coal. Most of the new "clean" coal plants proposed in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and other states will be located next to mines expected to serve as dump sites for coal ash. The Department of Energy and the coal companies actually promote coal ash disposal as a "clean coal technology." The following methods for disposal are being promoted as "beneficial" uses for the environment: mine-filling, agricultural use, use in cement, incorporation into concrete, and use in wallboards. The DOE and the coal industry say these uses are eco-friendly. They say that dumping in mines—or "mine reclamation" as they call it—will clean up the water draining from mines by lowering its acidity. The opposite is actually true, according to the Pennsylvania study, which found that in two-thirds of the sites, more toxic concentrations known to leach from ash were measured in the water after the ash was dumped in the mines. When used for soil amendment in agricultural use, the toxic metals from the ash can be taken up by plants and, again, leech out of the soil into the groundwater. The toxins in the ash can potentially pose problems in cement and concrete, especially in unmonitored facilities. "I have never seen levels of lead in a mine pool of that magnitude," says Robert Gadinski, another contributing author of the report. "And that includes lead sites where lead waste is supposed to be dumped. One example—at Marjol Battery in Scranton, Penn., where they dump battery casings and battery waste—even at that site, we never found lead at such high levels." Gadinski, a geologist retired from Pennsylvania's Department of Environmental Protection, knows about the dangers of coal ash. That's why he was none too pleased when he first read in the newspaper about a plan by PPL Utilities to start dumping coal ash in the mine by his house in Mowry, Pennsylvania. "I know that there are mine tunnels from the valley where I live into these mine workings," Gadinski said. "Any water that comes out of it is going to drain into the valley and go right to the groundwater. Hundreds of wells are at risk here." A month later, PPL was ordered by the state Dept. of Environmental Protection to clean up a spill of 100 million gallons of coal ash in the Delaware River due to the toxic and carcinogenic nature of the discharge. "And that's the same stuff they want to dump here, saying it's beneficial," said Gadinski referring to the Dept. of Environmental Protection. Gadinksi has been fighting the initiative for three years, filing complaints with the state government and appealing the matter to the federal government's Office of Surface Mining. All to no avail. Though the project was on hold while a new co-generation plant (Schuylkill Energy) took over, the Dept. of Environmental Protection still supports plans to go forward. The EPA acknowledges that coal ash dumping has contaminated the water at levels exceeding federal drinking water standards in Indiana, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin. The only reason more cases have not been documented is that most dump sites lack monitoring systems to detect contamination, says Lisa Evans, an attorney with the Earth Justice environmental group. "Where we're finding cases of damage is where there is monitoring data," said Evans. "But it's not where the worst disposal practices are. [For example,] data from around 2000 showed that Wisconsin had more sites with contaminated water than other states, but that's because Wisconsin actually had a better state program, so they were able to detect the contamination." Evans insists that even though hard data has only been documented in certain states, "this is really an issue everywhere you have coal and don't have strict regulations for its disposal." Certainly it suggests that there's something environmental in that area that would promote an increased instance of that disease. The EPA released a report publicizing the health risks of coal ash dumping in 2000. Eight years later, the agency has still taken no action to regulate disposal practices. In August 2007, the agency released a Notice of Data Availability on the Disposal of Coal Combustion Wastes requesting public comments on the data. Now, in the coming weeks, environmental groups will submit their comments and proposals to the EPA, calling for stricter regulations, better monitoring, and investigations to obtain data on coal ash dump sites all over the country. Whether anything will actually come of this is debatable. Wertman, the former prison guard from Tamaqua, says that in his hometown, politics gets in the way of tackling any of the environmental factors that could have caused his illness. He talks about a specific case in which the ATSDR admitted that Polycythemia Vera can be tied to environmental factors. Soon after the the public health agency published an abstract (available here) reporting this information in Blood, the science journal for the American Society of Hematology, agency officials started backpedaling. Now, anyone who tries searching for this information on the agency's website will find a statement contradicting the agency's own findings by claiming, "No link has been found between environmental factors and PV cases in the Pennsylvania counties Schuylkill, Luzerne and Carbon." Dr. Zev Wainberg, an oncologist/hematologist at the Santa Monica-UCLA Medical Center and Orthopaedic Hospital, said that the high rates of such a rare disease in this area are surprising. "Certainly it suggests, " Wainberg said in an interview, "that there's something environmental in that area that would promote an increased instance of that disease. Because this is an uncommon disease—it's not a disease that affects that many people, typically, in a small population. But that being said, it's a lot easier to say that than it is to prove it." ABUSES BY INCUMBENTS
Posted - February 5, 2008
State Representative David Argall with artificial cardboard check We are particularly concerned about the abuses of office by our state senators and representatives. They are using our tax money to constantly campaign for re-election. They claim that their efforts are to inform the public or to receive comments from the public but the truth is that they are constantly running for re-election on our dime. Here is a list of some of their tools of abuse: Cardboard checks; Let's look at just a few of these tools of abuse. Our favorite is the cardboard check. These legislators are returning our tax money and they are claiming that they have done something special for us. The truth is that they are simply trying to bribe us with our own money. The money was coming whether or not they were our representatives and they seldom have anything to do with getting the money. In addition, the number of cardboard checks always increases as Election Day nears. Is there any doubt that cardboards checks are just a tool for incumbent legislators to campaign for re-election? Walking Around Money or WAM is a particularly abused tool. The General Assembly has granted itself $360 million of our tax money to spend as it likes, mostly for stealth re-election campaigns. To add insult to injury, our legislators refuse to say where the money is located in the state budget and they don't have to tell us because the Legislature is exempt from Pennsylvania's open-records law. The legislators use WAMs to subsidize a wide range of community services with some of the money being used for grants with names like "community revitalization and assistance" and "urban development." A recent newspaper article described the WAM money tool as follows: "Executive branch officials must, as a constitutional matter, retain the authority to disburse the grants. However, grant applications are typically made through the local legislator, and Rendell administration officials acknowledge that the most likely to receive approval are the ones that arrive with a recommendation by legislative leaders. "The control that legislative leaders and executive branch officials exert over grants that help the image – and re-election chances – of rank-and-file legislators is a corrupting, if not unconstitutional, relationship, some advocates say." The WAMs are just another tool for incumbent legislators to campaign for re-election at taxpayer expense. Glossy brochures and questionnaires are another abused tool. The legislators use government printing at taxpayer expense purportedly to inform us of what they are doing and to get our input on specific issues. Did they inform us of their illegal pay raise or get our input on the illegal pay raise before they enacted it in the middle of the night? We are particularly bothered when we receive a glossy questionnaire, with a smiling picture of our legislator, in our mailbox asking us whether or not we would like to have property taxes eliminated. They have to be kidding. If they have to ask whether or not we want to have property taxes eliminated, they must be living on another planet. Have they talked with any of their constituents? Have they read any newspaper articles? Maybe they are too busy passing out cardboard checks or WAM money? Of course, our representatives know the answer to these simple questions. However, they have to ask the questions as a way to use the glossy questionnaire as a tool to campaign for re-election at taxpayer expense. Likewise, the newspaper opinions, the telephone town meetings, the citizens' breakfasts, the television legislative reports and the public service announcements are not mechanisms for informing the public or for receiving public comments but are tools for incumbent legislators to run for re-election at taxpayer expense. What can you do about these abuses? You can withhold your vote from any incumbent who uses these taxpayer-financed tools of deception to campaign for re-election and we do not know of any incumbent legislators who do not use these tools for their own re-election campaigns. The next time that you see your legislator's smiling face on a glossy brochure that you are paying for, remember that your legislator is trying to deceive you. You can start to correct these injustices by voting out the incumbents in 2008. JOHN SCHICKRAM ANNOUNCES CANDIDACY FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE
Posted - February 12, 2008
John Schickram stated, "The commonwealth is in a state of disrepair. The highways and bridges are crumbling and our property tax system is broken. What are the folks in Harrisburg doing? They are bluffing us with phony property tax reform and are telling us that they need to raise taxes or toll the interstate highways to get the money for road and bridge repair. Hogwash!" "There is no funding crisis in Pennsylvania. There is plenty of taxpayers' money in Harrisburg. However, our present representatives have their priorities all screwed up. They are spending hundreds of millions on convention centers, stadiums and other questionable projects for the benefit of a few well-connected millionaires." "They are spending $360 million a year of our tax money on discretionary spending known as Walking Around Money or WAMs, which is passed out like candy at the whim of legislators who remain in the good graces of their party leaders." "They are spending hundreds of millions a year of taxpayers' money on subsidies for unproven technologies for the benefit of some politically connected campaign contributors." "They are spending $75 million a year of taxpayer money to attract Hollywood millionaires to make movies in Pennsylvania. "They are spending millions a year on obscene retirement packages and pay raises for themselves at taxpayers' expense." "Our current legislators do not have their priorities straight. We need a legislator who will do what you send him to Harrisburg to do. I will give priority to programs that benefit all Pennsylvanians such as bridge and highway repair and will work to stop giving priority to discretionary programs and programs that only benefit a few politically connected individuals."
John Schickram has been a successful local businessman for the past three decades. He currently owns Schickram's Car Wash, Excavation, Welding and Hauling businesses. He is a former member of the Rush Township Board of Supervisors. During his six-year tenure, four as Chairman of the Supervisors, there was not a single tax increase inRush Township. John is also a combat decorated Vietnam veteran and a volunteer fireman for almost 40 years. He is a member of the Tamaqua Masonic Temple, Shriners, Elks, Moose, Odd Fellows and Lions organizations. He is also a member of the VFW, AmVets, and Veterans of the Vietnam War organizations. John Schickram has been married to his wife Carol for 36 years. They have two daughters, Amy and Johnna. John and Carol are members of St. John United Church of Christ in Tamaqua. For more information on John Schickram's candidacy, visit www.schickram.com. NEW EVIDENCE OF CORRUPTION AT THE CDC AND ATSDR
Posted - February 15, 2008 The following article is by Sue Sturgis and is also posted on her Hometown Hazards' web site: www.hometownhazards.com Last year the people of the Hometown area bore witness as representatives of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, a division of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, lied to us in an effort to hide inconvenient truths about pollution's impact on our health. During an October meeting in Hazleton, we heard representatives of the ATSDR tell us that a study into the area's unusually high rate of polycythemia vera conducted by the agency and independent researchers found no environmental factors contributing to the rare blood malignancy's prevalence. Soon after that, however, we discovered an abstract of that very study posted online that said the researchers found an unusual cluster of the disease centered around the McAdoo Associates Superfund site just north of Hometown. Even after ATSDR officials disavowed that finding, saying the study contained "erroneous information" and needed to be revised, the researchers continued to insist that their data points to an environmental factor behind the elevated incidence rates. One of the researchers confided to me that they were feeling pressure from higher-ups at the CDC to back off from those claims. Now more evidence has emerged of the CDC's eagerness to cover up inconvenient scientific truths -- and to punish the researchers who unearth them. The Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit investigative journalism organization, last week published a story that describes how the CDC blocked publication of an ATSDR study into environmental hazards in the eight Great Lakes states reportedly because of its alarming findings about health effects. The study -- which was conducted at the request of the International Joint Commission, an independent organization that advises the U.S. and Canadian governments on the quality of boundary waters between the two countries -- found that more than nine million people who live in some two dozen communities including Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit and Milwaukee may face elevated health risks from toxic exposures. It also found low birth weights, elevated rates of infant mortality and premature births, and elevated death rates from various cancers with environmental links. The CDC's response? Bury the study. Reports CPI: Last July, several days before the study was to be released, ATSDR suddenly withdrew it, saying that it needed further review. In a letter to Christopher De Rosa, then the director of the agency's division of toxicology and environmental medicine, Dr. Howard Frumkin, ATSDR's chief, wrote that the quality of the study was "well below expectations." When the Center contacted Frumkin's office, a spokesman said that he was not available for comment and that the study was "still under review." And guess what happened to De Rosa? After complaining to his bosses that the withholding of the study smacked of scientific censorship, he was demoted. He's currently trying to get his old job back, claiming that the demotion represented illegal retaliation by Frumkin. Why would the CDC squelch such an important study and punish the renowned researcher behind it? CPI asked Canadian biologist and IJC member Michael Gilbertson, who was also one of the study's peer reviewers, for his thoughts: "It's not good because it's inconvenient," Gilbertson said. "The whole problem with all this kind of work is wrapped up in that word 'injury.' If you have injury, that implies liability. Liability, of course, implies damages, legal processes, and costs of remedial action. The governments, frankly, in both countries are so heavily aligned with, particularly, the chemical industry, that the word amongst the bureaucracies is that they really do not want any evidence of effect or injury to be allowed out there." KEYSTONE OPPORTUNITY ZONES
Posted - February 20, 2008  Eames Bakery KOZ in Tamaqua Keystone Opportunity Zones or KOZs are part of a Pennsylvania government program intended to increase economic development by reducing or eliminating state and local taxes at the expense of ordinary taxpayers. Thousands of new jobs predicted at the program's inception in 1998 have failed to materialize. Most people know that the program is nothing more than corporate welfare for companies that would have built new local facilities and hired more people without tax breaks. Let's look at a couple of KOZ stories. The old Eames Bakery building at the corner of Elm and Washington Streets in Tamaqua is located within a Keystone Opportunity Zone, which offers tax forgiveness incentives for renovation and use of blighted properties. In May 2002, local officials approved sale of the former bakery complex to a Chester County man who claimed that he was going to establish a microbrewery on the property. The microbrewery never materialized. In 2005, a Tuscarora company announced plans to purchase the former Eames Bakery building and to use it to manufacture equipment and do maintenance for another company specializing in waxes. The rest of the building would be made available as a community recreation center for indoor baseball and soccer. To date, the only thing that has materialized has been the tree growing on the roof of the building. Meanwhile the taxpayers must make up for the lost tax revenues from this folly. Cabela's is a Nebraska-based specialty retailer of hunting, fishing, camping and related outdoor recreation merchandise. In 2007, that company generated over $2 billion in revenues with 26 stores across the nation. State and local officials enticed Cabela's to build a store in Tilden Township, outside of Hamburg, PA, by giving the company more than $32 million in tax breaks, including KOZ status. In September 2003, Cabela's opened its largest store outside of Hamburg, a town with a population of approximately 4000. In other words, the tax breaks were equivalent to $8,000 for every man, woman and child in the Borough of Hamburg! State and local agencies were bragging about the taxpayer benefits of the original deal but officials from the Pennsylvania Department of Economic and Community Development said the agency was not tracking sales tax revenue. Also, Tilden Township officials said they had no data on local property tax revenues. So no one knows if the deal is stimulating other development. None of the public officials could provide any specific numbers about the deal's outcome. Cabela's employs approximately 600 people at its Hamburg store. This number includes both full-time and part-time employees in relatively low paying jobs. With more than $32 million in tax breaks, it is costing taxpayers more than $53,000 for each job created! This is economic madness. In 1998, State Representative David Argall voted to approve the original KOZ legislation. Today, Mr. Argall describes the KOZ program as a "mixed bag" of results. Wasting taxpayer money on failed corporate welfare programs does not constitute a mixed bag of results in the eyes of taxpayers. Argall, Sewage Sludge Profiteer?
Posted - February 22, 2008 The following story appeared on The Clarke Report website (http://clarkereport.wordpress.com/) on February 20, 2008. Documents recently obtained by the Clarke Report show that Rep. David Argall (R-124) received over TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS in campaign contributions from area landowners who allowed dangerous sewage sludge to be dumped on their property in East Brunswick Township. The dumping on Jeff and Vicki Hill's property caused an uproar in the township as residents complained about the horrible smell, the attraction of flies, and the leakage of sludge into neighbors' wells. According to campaign finance records, from 2001 through 2005, the Hill's made six donations totaling $2400 to the Volunteers for Argall, his campaign committee. John Schickram, Argall's challenger in the April GOP Primary, finds these facts disconcerning. "I am very disappointed in Dave. He keeps telling the people that he is opposed to the dumping, while at the same time taking money from the dumpers for his re-election efforts," he said. In response to their citizen's many concerns, the East Brunswick Township Board of Supervisors passed an ordinance in 2006 that banned the spreading of sewage biosolids. "The smell was so strong and so bad that a school bus driver nearly passed out from the fumes while driving," said one East Brunswick resident. "There are so many flies around in the summer time, its hard to do anything outside if you live by one of the farms." However, the corporations dumping the sludge would not accept the townships' decision and plead their case to the state government. They believe that ordinance violated state law, specifically the Agricultural Community Rural Environment (ACRE) law of 2005, which restricts the ability of local governments to control corporate farming activity. Attorney General Tom Corbett agreed and promptly filed suit in the Commonwealth Court to overturn the township ordinance. In today's [February 20, 2008] Pottsville Republican, Corbett is quoted as saying, "If every municipality were to pass different (farming) regulations, no one would be able to conduct business." Schickram disagrees. "Local governments need and deserve to have control over fundamental issues of importance like determining whether to allow companies to dump dangerous chemicals in their backyard," he said. "This could be a health issue that affects many in the township. The Board of Supervisors should be able to look into it before any dumping is to occur." Schickram has been a staunch advocate of local government control for years and has been supporting the residents in East Brunswick Township in their fight with the state. "I stand by Annette (Etchberger) and Regina (Wiyda) in their crusade to wrestle control of local issues from state government," Schickram stated. Etchberger and Wiyda's crusade culminated yesterday when they presented AG Corbett with a 203-signature letter requesting that the Commonwealth allow East Brunswick officials to exercise their State Constitutional authority to self govern. They also sent a letter to Argall and State Sen. James Rhoades (R-29) asking them to pass legislation overturning ACRE. TOXICS RELEASE INVENTORY FOR SCHUYLKILL COUNTY
Posted - February 26, 2008  Gilberton Power Co., Frackville, PA On February 21, 2008, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency released the results of its Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) for the year 2006. The TRI is a database containing detailed information on nearly 650 chemicals that are released from facilities by industry and government. Complete information about the 2006 reporting year is available at:http://epa.gov Once again, the TRI showed alarming amounts of pollutants being spewed into the environment in Schuylkill County. We are being forced to breathe the toxins released into the air and to drink those finding their way into our water. For 2006, the TRI showed 3,299,869 pounds of chemical releases in Schuylkill County. Six facilities accounted for 90.5% of the releases. They were:
All but ITT Gould Pumps were waste-coal burning cogeneration plants. The five cogeneration plants accounted for 75.9% of the toxic releases in Schuylkill County. In neighboring Carbon County, the lone cogeneration plant, Panther Creek Partners, Nesquehoning, released 480,503 pounds of toxic chemicals. This facility accounted for 81.3% of the toxic releases in the county. These toxic releases may cause cancer or linger in human tissues or the environment. The released chemicals that we are being forced to breath and drink include the following: • Antimony compounds How do these toxic releases compare to those in other states? An analysis of the TRI data for lead by another scientist showed that the five waste-coal burning cogeneration plants in Schuylkill County released nearly as much lead as all the facilities in New Mexico or Maryland! That is right. The five facilities in Schuylkill County released nearly as much toxic lead into the environment as all of the facilities released in the entire state of New Mexico or the entire state of Maryland. It is time to wake up and smell the pollution. Our legislators have passed the laws that legalized the dumping of these toxic chemicals into our environment. In return, our legislators received generous contributions for their reelection campaigns from the industries spewing these toxic chemicals upon us. The next time that you hear about cancer, birth defects, multiple sclerosis, asthma and other environmentally related conditions in your family or friends, please remember that most of these problems were preventable. We have to change the laws so that the innocent people are protected from the greed of the corporations. You can do something to start to correct these injustices by voting out all incumbent legislators. They either voted for the laws legalizing the pollution or refused to speak out against the laws. The power to change is in your hands. |
John H. Schickram of Tamaqua formally announced that he will seek the Republican nomination for State Representative for the 124th District (Schuylkill and Berks counties) in the April 22nd primary election.