Tom Reed’s Townhall meeting in Hector, NY

bigflats_well_300x200_110518“Why can’t we do both?” — Tom Reed

The quotations are from the  Observer-Review article cited below.

Tom Reed listens to his constituents at Hector, NY, or does he?

HECTOR—Marcellus Shale hydraulic fracturing and the proposed Reading liquid petroleum gas storage facility ended up being the main focuses of a town hall meeting held by Rep. Tom Reed (R-Corning), Saturday, Aug. 27.

Around 50 members of the public came to the meeting at the Hector town hall.  Reed started out the meeting by focusing on the current financial state of the country, before fracking took over. Comments from the public led from the economy and business when Hector resident Lynn Gulkis said area business here depends on tourism.  She said, “fracking cannot be allowed in Hector” as that process would threaten tourism.

Reed replied by saying he has connections to this area (a hunting cabin in the Finger Lakes National Forest and a cottage on Keuka Lake).  He said if fracking can be done safely and responsibly, then it should be allowed.  He added he has driven through Pennsylvania and talked to businesses where drilling is allowed, finding some that do support it.

Oh, really–some do support it. Who knew?

Libby Foust, Trumansburg resident whose family owns a farm in Troy, Pa., interjected that yes the money the gas companies pays is lucrative, “but that’s not the only thing.”  She said her family farm was destroyed and she helped her father move out of the Troy home because the land was no longer usable.

“Farmers tell me it’s worth it,” said Reed.  He added there is a point and counter point to all arguments.  He said the fracking process needs oversight and reasonable regulations.  Reed also promised during the meeting to visit Foust’s farm to see what has happened there.

When told by the audience if he supported hydrofracking he was not the representative for them, Reed replied that “I am who I am.  I am in support of the industry of natural gas.”  He added about natural gas drilling and clean water, “why in America can’t we have both?”

Why indeed? Is it possible that the two are incompatible, or only that strict regulations, an unlikely prospect, would be needed?

Reed was also questioned about oil and gas companies being exempt from the federal Clean Air and Clean Water Acts.  He replied that regulating Marcellus Shale drilling should be done by the states.  He explained that having the federal government making rules was “big government.”  Reed added the federal government would just create “one size fits all” regulations which might not work in every state.  This was met with comments from the public that “water doesn’t stop at borders.”  Reed also said on the state level there is a chance of the Finger Lakes being exempt from the drilling like the proposed Syracuse and New York City watersheds.

Is there a valid reason that “regulating Marcellus Shale drilling should be done by the states?” Besides dropping buzzwords, Tom didn’t explain? If fracking is too dangerous for the Finger Lakes, why is it acceptable in the Susquehanna watershed for example?

Near the end of the meeting Reed was asked for his stance on the proposed Inergy liquid petroleum gas storage and transfer station in Reading.  He said he didn’t know enough about the project, but that the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation should handle it, which is what is happening. Comments from the public once again said the industry would impact tourism.

“Why can’t we do both?” Reed said.

Discussion about the economy at the start of the meeting included a member of the public suggesting taxes be raised.  Reed countered with “that will kill the economy.”

He added that Pres. Barack Obama had the chance to raise taxes before Republicans took control of the House of Representatives.  Reed also said since Obama extended the Bush era tax cuts, he now refers to them as “Obama tax cuts.”

Oh, is that right? Reed is as slippery as an eel, isn’t he? Yet one would think that since Tom never considered a tax cut he didn’t like, “Obama tax cuts” would be a good thing in his opinion.

Did Tom listen to his constituents at Hector. This Observer-Review article suggests that mostly he argued with them.

© William Hungerford – October 2014

http://www.observer-review.com/public-calls-out-reed-on-fracking-stance-cms-2463

https://newny23rd.com/2014/09/19/one-in-four-americans-want-their-state-to-secede-from-the-u-s-really/

Advertisements

About whungerford

* Contributor at NewNY23rd.com where we discuss the politics, economics, and events of the New New York 23rd Congressional District (Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Chemung, (Eastern) Ontario, Schuyler, Seneca, Steuben,Tioga, Tompkins, and Yates Counties) Please visit and comment on whatever strikes your fancy.
This entry was posted in 2014, Congress, Constituents, Economics, Environmental, fracking, Hydrofracking/Gas& Oil Industry, Political, Reed's Views and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

44 Responses to Tom Reed’s Townhall meeting in Hector, NY

  1. Anne says:

    Tom knows what he knows, by god, facts be damned.

    • BOB McGILL says:

      somebody needs to tell the people in Hecter that nobody is even thinking about drilling in that area at the present time. The target area for drilling is where the shale is at least 2000 feet deep. Also there IS and HAS BEEN underground gas storage in the salt mines since the 1960s.

      • BOB McGILL says:

        SHOULD HAVE ASKED IF YOU ARE DEB TOO 🙂

      • pystew says:

        Bob, I know it is hard to understand that some people are concerned about the environment even if it does not affect them directly.

        • BOB McGILL says:

          So tell me, if the gas companies have been fracking in New York since 1959, why are the people so concerned about something that has not caused a problem, that anyone can prove, in 54 years ?

          • Anne says:

            We know you don’t like education, Bob, but perhaps you ought to educate yourself on the differences between fracking then and fracking now.

          • BOB McGILL says:

            OK anne tell us what is so different other than they now use food grade chemicals or no chemicals at all, just water. Also explain that the radiation found in fracking flow back water is also found in all drinking water provided by your city or town and is somehow more dangerous. Go ahead show everyone just how smart you are.

          • Anne says:

            I’m sure not even you believe that frackers use “just water.” Here’s a pretty good place to start (and Propublica is non-partisan, public interest journalism): http://www.propublica.org/series/fracking You can also take a look at a congressional report on the subject,(http://democrats.energycommerce.house.gov/index.php?q=news/committee-democrats-release-new-report-detailing-hydraulic-fracturing-products) wherein you’ll see that there are over 750 chemicals frackers pour into our ground water (and which, in some cases, escape into the air) and of these, a significant portion are known carcinogens. My aunt and uncle lived in a town in NE PA, and their water well–along with many other wells in their town–were contaminated by benzene. With the Halliburton loophole, of course, the whole industry is exempted from having to comply with the Safe Water Drinking Act. Sorry you don’t seem to like smart women, either, Bob, but on this issue, both the science and the evidence are soundly against you.

          • BOB McGILL says:

            Energy industry develops nontoxic fracking fluids
            Associated Press
            By KEVIN BEGOS February 3, 2013 1:18 PM
            AP FILE – In this Wednesday, April 15, 2009 file photo, an unidentified worker steps through the maze of hoses being used at a remote fracking site being run by Halliburton for natural-gas producer Williams in Rulison, Colo. The oil and gas industry is trying to ease environmental concerns by developing non-toxic fluids for the drilling process known as fracking. But it’s not clear whether the fluids will be widely embraced by drilling companies. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski, File)

            .
            View photo

            FILE – In this Wednesday, April 15, 2009 file photo, an unidentified worker steps through the maze of hoses being used at a remote fracking site being run by Halliburton for natural-gas producer Williams in Rulison, Colo. The oil and gas industry is trying to ease environmental concerns by developing non-toxic fluids for the drilling process known as fracking. But it’s not clear whether the fluids will be widely embraced by drilling companies. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski, File)
            .

            PITTSBURGH (AP) — The oil and gas industry is trying to ease environmental concerns by developing nontoxic fluids for the drilling process known as fracking, but it’s not clear whether the new product will be widely embraced by drilling companies.

            Houston-based energy giant Halliburton Inc. has developed a product called CleanStim, which uses only food-industry ingredients. Other companies have developed nontoxic fluids as well.

            “Halliburton is in the business to provide solutions to our customers,” said production manager Nicholas Gardiner. “Those solutions have to include ways to reduce the safety or environmental concerns that the public might have.”

            Environmental groups say they welcome the development but still have questions.

            The chemicals in fracking fluids aren’t the only environmental concern, said George Jugovic, president of PennFuture. He said there is also concern about the large volumes of naturally occurring but exceptionally salty wastewater and air pollution.

            It’s premature to say whether it will ever be feasible to have fluids for fracking that are totally nontoxic, said Scott Anderson, a senior adviser for the Environmental Defense Fund.

            “But we are encouraged to some extent by recent industry efforts to at least reduce the toxicity,” Anderson said.

            Fracking, short for hydraulic fracturing, has made it possible to tap into energy reserves across the nation but also has raised concerns about pollution, since large volumes of water, along with sand and hazardous chemicals, are injected deep into the ground to free the oil and gas from rock.

            Regulators contend that overall, water and air pollution problems are rare, but environmental groups and some scientists say there hasn’t been enough research on those issues. The industry and many federal and state officials say the practice is safe when done properly, but faulty wells and accidents have caused problems.

            Halliburton says CleanStim will provide “an extra margin of safety to people, animals and the environment in the unlikely occurrence of an incident” at a drilling site.

            Gardiner said Halliburton has developed a chemistry-scoring system for the fluids, with lower scores being better. CleanStim has a zero score, he said, and is “relatively more expensive” than many traditional fracking fluids.

            Both Jugovic and Anderson noted that one of the most highly publicized concerns about toxic fracking fluids hasn’t really been an issue: the suggestion that they might migrate from thousands of feet underground, up to drinking water aquifers.

            “Most people agree there are no confirmed cases so far” of fracking chemicals migrating up to drinking water, Anderson said. But he added that simple spills of fluid on the surface can cause problems.

            “The most likely of exposure is not from the fracking itself. It is from spills before the fracking fluid is injected,” Anderson said.

            Terry Engelder, a geologist at Penn State University, said he visited a well in that state last year that used just water, sand and three additives in the fracking fluid.

            But Engelder added that “green” and “toxic” can be “soft words without real meaning.” He noted that consumers, businesses and farms use vast quantities of chemicals that can contribute to pollution, from cleaners and soaps to fertilizers and pesticides. Yet all those compounds are routinely flushed down the drain, ending up in nearby rivers and streams.

            “Eventually industry would like to end up with a mix of just water, sand, and food-grade additives,” Engelder said of fracking. “Companies are learning to deal with fewer and fewer additives.”

        • BOB McGILL says:

          http://www.dec.ny.gov › Energy and Climate › Oil and Gas

          The Marcellus Shale is a black shale formation … No known instances of groundwater contamination have occurred from … or conventional fracking

          • BOB McGILL says:

            here is a part of the above link , ” As a result of New York’s rigorous regulatory process, the types of problems reported to have occurred in states without s “uch strong environmental laws and rigorous regulations haven’t happened here. No known instances of groundwater contamination have occurred from previous horizontal drilling or hydraulic fracturing projects in New York State ‘.
            😛

      • solodm says:

        Hint: “At the present time” sounds very “Reedian”. Hector land use area is for local enjoyment and tourism, not toxic fracking. For a person who claims to love wildlife, Bob, your defense of Tom Reed is incomprehensible.

        • BOB McGILL says:

          I’m not defending Tom ! I take pleasure in making stupid people look stupid. It’s a habit I learned in first grade, making the teachers look stupid.

  2. Maureen Harding says:

    The end of the Observer article states that a parent of a son is being held in Dubai and that the Congressman’s office was no help. Thereby, the Congressman said that his staff had brought it to his attention and that a call was put in to the UAE. He said it was his fault for not calling the parent back.

    Apparently, 1) The parent’s son has not been released, and therefore, the Congressman’s office is in truth, “No help”, and 2) Remember this: Tom Reed rarely if ever returns a phone call. Nothing changes, if nothing changes.

  3. Jim says:

    Sounds to me like Tom is the first Congressman I’ve heard tell the truth.

  4. BOB McGILL says:

    why would you call a congressman anyway ? It is a well known fact that the US does not make deals with terrorists. Tom can’t do a thing about it.

    • pystew says:

      Unless you are President Ronald Reagan then you can deal with terrorists. (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/reagan-iran/)

      • BOB McGILL says:

        talk to youe democratic president, see what he has to say.
        time.com/2809612/bowe-bergdahl-obama-taliban/‎Cached
        Jun 2, 2014 … “It has long been America’s unwavering, bipartisan policy not to negotiate with
        terrorists, especially for the exchange of hostages,” argues …

        • pystew says:

          Bob, he is OUR President—not just the president of the Democrats–like Reed is OUR representative–not just the representatives of the Tea Party.

        • BOB McGILL says:

          not exactly, it’s your propaganda that has turned me away from the deomcratic party ! I will not take part in such lies. Personally I know for a fact that you are WRONG on almost every issue.

      • BOB McGILL says:

        are there terrorists in Dubai ? I think the guy is in jail.

    • BOB McGILL says:

      gee, it just came to me that maybe the guy was in jail for some reason. Did he break the law ? Just a minor detail.

    • Anne says:

      Dubai is part of the UAE and yes, we have diplomatic relations with them. When someone is arrested or detained overseas, the first place to contact is the State Department. I’m not sure why they would have gone through Reed’s office unless they thought he might be able to expedite the process for them, but since Reed is largely ineffectual in every other thing he does, none of us should be surprised he wasn’t any help here. I am sorry for that family and hope they find some resolution to their situation soon; I can imagine how worried they must be.

      • BOB McGILL says:

        So you admit the guy may be detained legally, then why not let him face the music. Or do you want to send in the Marines and an aircraft carrier ? Can you imagine if Reed said ” your son is a criminal, there is nothing I can do “

        • Anne says:

          I have no idea what the circumstances of his detention might be, Bob. But it’s more than easy for me to imagine Reed doing nothing in this, or any, instance–all he’s done in his time in office is feather his own nest and advance his own interests.

          • BOB McGILL says:

            it’s easy for you to imagine all right, you seem to emagine all kinds of things. Do you actually think one congressman can tell another country what to do ? for that matter, do you think one congressman can tell the US what to do ? I can see it now, ” Reed tells the US to go get this guy.”

  5. Anne says:

    I don’t think you quite understood the point, Bob…State is the place to call; we can only guess why the family chose to contact Reed’s office unless, as I stated, they thought he could perhaps expedite matters for them. In the same situation any one of us with children would probably tap all avenues we could think of in an effort to find some answers, or some help. No one claimed “one congressman” (let alone ours, who is ineffective in just about everything) could “tell another country what to do.” I don’t imagine the parents of this individual thought so, either.

    • BOB McGILL says:

      and of course, ” asking a congressman for special favors ” is ok, right. If it were my family member, and he did something wrong, I’d let him deal with it himself. That’s how kids learn, mommy and daddy can’t bail him out this time. What’s he doing in Dubai anyway ?
      You people started picking on Tom without knowing enough detail in this matter.

      • Anne says:

        Since you don’t have kids, Bob, it’s impossible for you to know how you would react in a similar situation.

        • BOB McGILL says:

          but I was a kid once ! AND I DO KNOW, that’s exactly why I didn’t have kids. Do you think that I don’t have friends with kids ? If you do you’re wrong, my friends are saying the same thing all the time, once the kid is 18 and they are done being daddy.

          • solodm says:

            Terribly sorry I have been so hard on you Bob. Obviously you had one hell-of-a miserable childhood. But of course you could still attempt therapy, it couldn’t hurt.

        • BOB McGILL says:

          some ( and not just a few )of the women that are, say 40ish, say if they knew then,what they know now, they wouldn’t have kids.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s