ShareThis Page
Letters to the Editor

Extraction tax's effects

| Friday, March 21, 2014, 8:57 p.m.

The election season is upon us, and the first commercials have begun to appear. The Democrat front-runner for governor has been running a TV commercial where he proposes to impose an “extraction tax” on natural gas drillers/extractors. The income from the tax would then be used to “help fund education.” Wow, that sounds so great that Mom and Pop can hardly wait to get to the polls. The evil gas companies will get their comeuppance, and little Johnny and Suzy might not end up being as dumb as they seem to be trending.

But wait! The small country school district in which I reside is spending more than $20,000 per student per year on education, and we've probably reached the point where throwing more money at trying to smarten up Johnny and Suzy will have no effect. Perhaps other options need to be explored.

Also, would a sensible person expect that the gas suppliers will simply absorb the increased tax — and not pass it on to their customers in the form of higher energy bills? They have only one source of income — that is, customers like you, me and industry.

Net result — we'll have a new governor. Mom and Pop will have higher utility bills. Johnny and Suzy will be just as dumb, and Pop won't get the better job he was hoping for because the higher gas cost caused the new manufacturing plant that was going to be built to become unviable.

I'm not taking sides in an election. My point is that there is almost always a different way of looking at an issue besides the viewpoint of the one professing it.

Ed Kearney

Mt. Pleasant Township

Washington County

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me