Pennsylvania GOP lawmakers and a coalition of labor, management and consumers have denounced Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro’s plans to appeal a recent state appellate court ruling pulling the commonwealth out of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) program.
Just a few days before the 30-day deadline expires, Shapiro on Tuesday said his administration will appeal the Commonwealth Court’s Nov. 1 ruling that prevents Pennsylvania from participating in RGGI, a cap-and-trade program intended to cut carbon emissions from the power sector.
The governor ‘s spokesperson, Manuel Bonder, said in a statement issued yesterday, that the administration must appeal the court’s ruling because the opinion was based on a question of authority.
“The Commonwealth Court’s decision on RGGI — put in place by the prior administration — was limited to questions of executive authority, and our administration must appeal in order to protect that important authority for this administration and all future governors,” Bonder stated.
Meanwhile, Shapiro has never committed to the RGGI program and wants lawmakers to work with him on a RGGI alternative.
“The governor stands ready and willing to implement the recommendations of the RGGI Working Group — and he would sign legislation replacing RGGI with a Pennsylvania-based or PJM-wide cap-and-invest program, as they proposed,” according to Bonder’s statement. “Should legislative leaders choose to engage in constructive dialogue, the governor is confident we can agree on a stronger alternative to RGGI.
“If they take their ball and go home, they will be making a choice not to advance common-sense energy policy that protects jobs, the environment, and consumers in Pennsylvania,” Bonder added.
Shapiro’s office urged Republican and Democratic leadership to join the governor “at the productive table [he] has set with labor, environmental advocates, energy producers, and consumer advocates” to advance forward-looking energy policy.
“Now is the time for action, inaction is not an acceptable alternative,” Bonder said.
But supporters of the Commonwealth Court’s ruling may be hard pressed to sit at that negotiating table.
“As I have said since January, Gov. Shapiro had the ability to rescind the $600 million RGGI energy tax, but he chose not to,” said Pennsylvania House Republican Appropriations Chairman Seth Grove (R-196). “This cap-and-trade RGGI tax scheme will result in job losses in Pennsylvania while at the same time raising the price of energy. It’s a lose/lose for Pennsylvania.”
Grove also expressed frustration with Shapiro’s nearly year-long delay on making a final decision on RGGI participation, including what he says was a secretive working group that never reached a conclusion on how to move forward.
“Shapiro’s own working group didn’t approve RGGI, but he has now made it clear, he plans to continue Gov. Wolf’s disastrous plan putting Pennsylvania’s energy exporter status in jeopardy,” said Grove.
Pennsylvania Senate Majority Leader Joe Pittman (R-41) agreed, saying Shapiro has decided to carry “the failed mantle of his predecessor and appeal the decision to the Supreme Court.”
“Gov. Shapiro’s action further places family-sustaining jobs at risk and stymies the ability for any meaningful conversations on energy and environmental policy in the Pennsylvania legislature,” said Pittman. “The governor should be standing with working families who are struggling with inflationary costs and pressures from higher electric bills.”
The Commonwealth Court ruled specifically that the multi-state initiative to limit carbon emissions violates the state Constitution and that money raised through RGGI is an invalid tax.
“Ignoring the needs of Pennsylvanians while simultaneously trying to circumvent the constitution is a reckless and irresponsible approach,” Pittman added.
The PowerPA Jobs Alliance, a coalition of labor, management and consumers opposed to state carbon taxes on electric generation, manufacturing and motor fuels, also railed against Shapiro’s appeal for the same reasons.
“On the Tuesday before Thanksgiving, and in conflict with many of his pre- and post-election public statements and assurances, the governor has effectively adopted as his own anti-worker, anti-family energy policy, mimicking that of his predecessor,” tweeted PowerPA Jobs on X, formerly Twitter.
The alliance went on to say that Shapiro’s “troubling decision, which ultimately punts the outcome of the RGGI carbon tax to a gridlocked General Assembly,” does not address the ongoing financial and emotional concerns over RGGI from impacted workers and ratepayers struggling to make ends meet.
The implications of Shapiro’s appeal involves a choice of whether to side with the radical energy policy agenda or the interests of impacted workers and ratepayers, the group added.
“Taxpayers will continue to bear the tremendous costs of this litigation and Pennsylvania’s workers and families will have to continue to live with the uncertainty surrounding the ongoing, existential threat of the RGGI carbon tax,” PowerPA Jobs tweeted.
The Pennsylvania Coal Alliance is disappointed in the Shapiro administration’s decision to appeal, according to Executive Director Rachel Gleason.
“The governor claims he is willing to implement the recommendations of his RGGI Working Group, yet they never endorsed RGGI nor was a broad policy consensus reached,” she said. “While major energy policy should be determined by the General Assembly, embracing an illegal energy rulemaking that the court has deemed an unconstitutional tax with today’s appeal is not the General Assembly’s call.”
Moving forward, Grove offered an alternative plan for Shapiro to consider: “Keep taxes on energy producers low and keep taxes on energy consumers lower; if he can’t agree to this we know where his priorities lie.”
Pittman said he is hopeful the Supreme Court will quickly resolve the RGGI matter.
“We will not negotiate environmental and energy policy with the anvil of RGGI hanging over the heads of Pennsylvanians,” said Pittman. “The responsible enactment of energy policies which balance development of our God-given natural resources with environmental needs continues to be our focus.”
Environmental groups, including the Natural Resource Defense Council (NRDC) and Conservation Voters of Pennsylvania, reportedly urged Shapiro to appeal the Commonwealth Court’s ruling, which the NRDC called “misguided.”