Introduction: This is Senate Journal, with State Senator Jay Costa. Senate Journal, a look at Pennsylvania state government working today for the future of Pittsburgh, and Allegheny County.
Bill: Hello, everyone. Thanks for joining us on a special edition of our program. We are coming to you from the Senate Democratic Caucus room, which is adjacent to the Senate Chamber at the State Capitol of Harrisburg. In fact, you can see the chamber just over our shoulders, right there. This is a historic building. If you have not had the opportunity to visit, by all means, make the time to come for a visit. And you can do that by calling Senator Costa’s office. He’d be happy to help give you a tour.
Senator Jay Costa: Absolutely. It’s absolutely beautiful.
Bill: Work with everybody. It’s a gorgeous—the chamber itself is absolutely gorgeous.
Male: It is. It is priceless. And we’re here with your State Senator, Jay Costa who represents Pittsburgh, and Allegheny County in the Pennsylvania Senate. His colleagues have chosen him to be the Senate Democratic Leader. We have a new governor. The year is 2015. Let’s put aside the partisan politics, democrat, republican. Do you believe that the voters of Pennsylvania sent a message to Harrisburg by electing Tom Wolf? And if so, what’s the message?
Senator Jay Costa: I think clearly they’ve sent a message to the general assembly, and to everyone here in Harrisburg that they need to—we need collectively to focus on investment in education. I think that’s probably the single biggest thing that I’ve heard throughout the campaign, throughout 2014, was an investment in education. But right behind that was an investment in jobs. How we grow jobs in Pennsylvania to help Pennsylvania become more fiscally sustainable, and provide for the resources to make the investments. And not only in education, and growing jobs, but also in infrastructure, and other types of programs that stimulate the economy. That’s the clear message that I think we heard.
Bill: In order to do that, the state has to have a budget. And they, by law, the budget has to be balanced. So, we’re coming up on the 2015, 2016 state budget. And it appears, right now as we sit here today, there is a budget deficit that may top $2 billion. Does that come as a surprise to you, number one? And number two, what do we do about it?
Senator Jay Costa: Well, it’s not a surprise to Senate Democrats. We’ve been talking about it for the past couple of years, where we recognize that the fiscal policies that have been employed by this governor, our previous governor, as well as the general—the republicans in the general assembly, got us to this point. Where we are in excess of $2 billion structural deficit that needs to be addressed. We did a lot of one time gimmicks. We took money out of different pots, and actually took money away from programs that were very, very successful, and used them to plug budget holes. Senate Democrats raised the alarm, back in June of this past 2014. And we believe it’s totally inappropriate to what they did. But then we raised the issue.
Now, we’re faced with a significant structural deficit that needs to be addressed. And to allow us to look at ways in which we can generate revenue to offset that structural deficit, we need to look at a number of things. One of the issues that we did hear loud, and clear from folks, was that across the Common Wealth Office, they wanted us to make—in order to make the investments in education, they wanted us to look at the position of an extraction tax on Marcellus Shale drilling. I think that’s one of the areas that I think will-will likely be going.
Question is, how much will it be? Senate democrats, and Governor Wolf have talked about a 5% extraction tax, layered on top of the return impact fee. We think that would be an appropriate level. Again, with a significant portion of those resources being driven into education programs, it will be disseminated all across the common wealth, to the 500 school districts. That’s one of the things we clearly learned from folks. But that’s what we have to do. And we need to bring stability to our financial position, here in Pennsylvania. If you look at the past couple of years, our bond rating agencies across the country, when they examine Pennsylvania they found that we were woefully deficient in terms of having appropriate level of revenues. And as a result, they lowered our bond rating on three different occasions. Our bond rating was reduced. Which means it costs us more money, to borrow money. But it also indicates that we have some real physical stability issues that need to be addressed. And that’s what we’re going to have to talk about, as we go forward this year.
Bill: In layman’s terms, what is a structural deficit?
Senator Jay Costa: That means we don’t have enough money to continue to fund the programs that are in place in Pennsylvania. That the onetime gimmicks that we used, we—you know, it’s almost like, when you have your monthly budget, and you borrow, you know, $50, or $100 from the piggy bank, the next time that you need to pay that same bill, the $50 is not there. That’s a structural deficit, basically.
Bill: But you were saying for more than a year—in fact, it was right after Governor Corbett delivered his last budget address. You immediately said, this is smoke and mirrors. We might balance it in a—in a flash, but the big picture remains very cloudy.
Senator Jay Costa: There’s no question the big picture is very cloudy. And again, that’s what the rating agencies have said to us. If you look at this year’s budget, we’re likely to end right where we projected our number would be. But again, we’re taking money from various programs, and different pots to sure that up. But going forward, next year, those dollars will not be there. And we don’t have any more pots, or any more shelves to look behind, or whatever. Those dollars aren’t there, anymore. We’ve really stripped down government over the course of the past four years that we’re at a place where we really cut down to the bone, in terms our expenditures. But also, the revenue side of the equation, we’ve also exhausted all those opportunities, and that’s why we have, as I said, a $2+ billion budget that we have to sort of reconcile with, as we go forward over the course of the next five months.
Bill: Let’s go back to Marcellus Shale, for a moment. Are we the only state, number one, that does not have a severance tax, number one? And number two, what do you say to opponents that say, “If we impose an extraction tax, it will hurt the industry?”
Senator Jay Costa: I-I think, what we have been saying all along, is that we need to make certain that Pennsylvania is competitive with the surrounding states, as it relates to revenue, and percentage that they get for the extraction tax in those respective states. Whatever you call it, a Marcellus Shale tax, whatever you call it, and we have an impact fee that is a part of that equation. At the end of the day, we have to generate more revenue from the Marcellus industry, to help us offset our costs. It’s just not about education, Bill. It’s also talking about making certain that we take some of those additional proceeds, and drive them into environmental programs, to make sure we sure up those programs. To make sure we look at enforcement, and regulatory aspects of it, through DEP, and DCNR, and whatever other agencies would need to be applied, where it will be applicable to.
So, we have a lot of work in that area, but the idea would be to pull more revenue from the industry, drive it into education. But also, drive portions into the environment, environmental protection, as well as working to make sure we can do some of the infrastructure that needs to be addressed because of the industry. What I tell folks, is that I don’t believe that they will not make the investments. I think they will make the investments. We’ve basically got three layers of the natural resources, here. Between the Utica, and the Marcellus, and there’s a third one that’s escaping me. But at the end of the day, they’re natural resources that all the residents of the Common Wealth own. And we should be driving some of that benefit to help our people pay for—or help the state provide services to people across the Common Wealth. Anywhere from education, as we talked about, to the environment, to the infrastructure, and job growth. Those—all those programs benefit from us working with the industry to have a requisite amount of money. The problem with Act 13 in our view, a couple years back when we passed it, was we didn’t get enough money from the industry. We let them off the hook.
Bill: Now, Act 13 is what?
Senator Jay Costa: Act 13 is the Marcellus Shale legislation that provided for an impact fee of less than about 1.5%. I mean, we really should be a lot higher than that. We’ve left the industry, let them off the hook by not actually receiving the right amount of money, in our view. As well as some of the environmental issues that we’ve raised through this process, over the last several years. How we didn’t think that was appropriate, either. So, at the end of the day, we need to revisit all that, and with a goal towards trying to—trying to generate a significant amount of revenue, to be able to make the investments that we need to make.
By no means, though, does that close our budget deficit of $2 billion. We have to look at other ways in which we’re going to generate revenue. Senate Democrats have been talking about a couple of areas. Medicaid expansion, fully implement Medicaid expansion as was intended by—through the Affordable Care Act. That would generate an excess of $200 million in state savings. We want to also cut the budget down as much as we can. Long term nursing home managed care is another concept that we’ve been pursuing. Whether we do a pilot program that saves maybe $40 or $50 million, or we do it state wide, like we do with the managed care for Medicaid expansion, or Medicaid. We’re looking at another quarter billion dollars in savings that the state will no longer have to pay by driving it out through the managed care organizations. That saves us a considerable amount of money. Long term care is one of the most expensive parts of what we do, through DPW. I should say, the Department of Human Services. And we need to address that, as we go forward. That’s where we need to look, to help offset those costs.
Bill: The interesting thing about Medicaid is—it is not a democratic/republican issue. When you take a look, for example, just a couple of miles from the district that you represent, you cross into Ohio. You’ve got a republican governor who said, yes, to Medicaid expansion. You drive to the eastern part of the state, you drive over to New Jersey, Governor Christie, a staunch republican, says yes to Medicaid expansion. Then of course, Governor Quinn of New York, and so on and so forth. So, this is not a republican and democrat thing.
Senator Jay Costa: It’s not. It’s an issue—in our view, it’s an issue of saving dollars for the Common Wealth, generating economic impact in our communities. When you look to the fact that you can generate—would generate about $3 billion, $2.5-3 billion of revenue being driven to the Common Wealth. Particularly in those areas that we have a lot of health care delivery taking place, like we do in Allegheny County, here in southeast PA. It generates jobs. And it generates, not my numbers, IFO, which is Independent Fiscal Office the PEW—or the PEW economy league, and the third one was Rand Corporation. Where all three of them have come out and said, if we implement Medicaid expansion, utilizing the managed care organization as originally designed under the affordable care act, we generate probably 35,000 jobs.
That puts people to work, that allows people to spend money, it drives taxes to the Common Wealth, but helps us address what we need to do. So, creates jobs, it saves money in our budget, and it also works to create additional tax revenue by virtue of those jobs being created. And more importantly, it provides health care. Health care to half a million folks.
Bill: Who don’t have it now.
Senator Jay Costa: Who don’t have it, today. And these are working individuals. I think we really need to be clear that this is—these are individuals who, when we wake up every day, we encounter them. Whether we’re going to get a cup of coffee somewhere in a coffee shop, or a waitress, or a waiter at the local restaurant. Or somebody who’s providing services in a health care facility. Typically someone who may be in a nursing home facility. You know, custodial duty. When you think about folks who don’t have health care, and how many employers do not provide it, this provides individuals who are making anywhere from $9 to $12 an hour the ability to have a level of health care that is appropriate for that—for what we need, in terms of a blanket health care policy. So, it’s not a Cadillac plan, or anything like that. It’s reasonable, modest health care that’s provided. That saves the Common Wealth dollars, and saves our institution dollars as well.
Bill: Let’s say that I drive through the favorite coffee shop every morning, on my way to work. And I’ve got the same person, who I know, and talk to each day who serves me my coffee. Maybe a little bit of breakfast, or so on. And he, or she does not have health care insurance. Okay? What happens to that individual when they become ill? Where do they go, and what does it cost?
Senator Jay Costa: They typically—they typically avoid getting the level of treatment that would be necessary—that they should be getting, in the early stages, if you have some type of coverage. Typically, they end up at an emergency room, which is the most expensive entry point into our healthcare delivery system. And it just continually drives up costs. Those costs, some of those costs are paid for by the individual. But in most instances, those costs are eaten by the hospital, the institutions. That’s why back when we did the tobacco settlement agreement, we provided for a significant amount of money for uncompensated care. Because we know our facilities do that. To this day, we provide uncompensated care dollars.
If you have the Medicaid expansion, as we’ve talked about, in addition to, you know, 500,000 folks, and all the economic benefits I’ve talked about, we’re also helping our institutions, because we will be reducing the level of uncompensated care that they have to eat at the end of the day.
Bill: Well, let’s take a look at the impact it would have on your district, which would be Pittsburgh, and Allegheny County, obviously. Isn’t health care the number one job provider, in general, in the county that you represent, number one? And number two, if we go with the Medicaid expansion, we’re talking about even increasing job opportunities. Is that right?
Senator Jay Costa: We would be increasing it across—across the Common Wealth. I think that’s important. So, at the end of the day, yeah. We provide a lot of health care services in southwestern Pennsylvania. Typically in Pittsburgh, and Allegheny County, that would grow. There’s no question. But the areas that aren’t that—don’t have that amount of health care delivery, and a lot of other parts of Pennsylvania that—they too would benefit, because there would be more activity, and more folks making their way to visits to the doctors, or whatever the case might be. Which I think, again, helps grow jobs, and helps provide for more healthy workforce across Pennsylvania.
Bill: Let’s get back to that budget. We talked about Medicaid expansion, as a possible relief. We’ve talked about Marcellus Shale extraction fee, as a possible relief. But that doesn’t close the whole—that doesn’t close the whole gap. You’ve got some ideas. You, and your colleagues, have some ideas to do that. What are some of those ideas?
Senator Jay Costa: Well, another thing we’ve been talking about—there’s been a lot of talk about wine, and spirit privatization. We believe that the appropriate way to go along those lines, is something called wine and spirit modernization. I think, as we look at our wine and spirit shops today, they’re not the same shops many of us remember 25 years ago. I think they’ve done a great job, in terms of recognizing that—they had to take great steps, on the retail side of things, and they’ve done that. And I think they make wine, in particular wine, and spirits to a lesser extent, far more accessible. And they’re far more knowledgeable about the products that they provide, and put on the shelves in these stores. We make great progress.
But there’s a lot more that can be done. And that’s what we’re looking at. We have some ideas, in our modernization plan that will probably generate an excess of an additional $100 million a year for the common wealth.
Bill: Modernization in what regard, Senator? In other words, more convenient hours? Easier to purchase wine, maybe? Out of state wine, whatever it might be.
Senator Jay Costa: There’s a variety of things, and it’s-it’s about how they administer the-the agencies. How it’s-it’s administered. But, for example, direct shipment of wine would be something that would be beneficial. Expanded hours. The number of Sunday hours, for example. Limitations that exist right now, we would grow those opportunities along those lines. And there’s a whole host of things like that, in terms of how we deal with employment practices at LCB. Things of that nature. You know, taking away the retail, or the real property side of that equation, and putting over, maybe, in DGS, which is more custom to doing that. As opposed to having a separate agency—
Bill: The Department of General Services.
Senator Jay Costa: General Services. So, there’s a variety of things that we talked about, some of which I just mentioned, that would likely generate an excess of $100 million in additional net revenue to the Common Wealth. And we need to be clear. LCB provides to the general fund every year, anywhere from $80 to $100 million in net profits.
Bill: It’s making money. It’s not costing you, and me anything. Is that correct?
Senator Jay Costa: It’s making money, driving money to the Common Wealth. And—
Bill: And what about the employees, too? They’re not costing us anything. Isn’t it true that they are being paid through the profits of—
Senator Jay Costa: Right. This is all—this is net profit.
Bill: It is no tax burden to the people of Pennsylvania, as it stands right now.
Senator Jay Costa: It’s the net—the net costs—net amount we drive to the Common Wealth, after all expenses are paid, an all taxes are paid, and all expenses are paid. And it’s employees, it’s state police, it’s liquor enforcement. A whole bunch of different people, who are paid through this process, to maintain the system in the way we do maintain it. It still nets about $80-$100 million, just given to the Common Wealth. To allow the Common Wealth to use it for whatever purpose they deem appropriate. My view is if we sell the system, as been proposed by others, selling it on the wholesale, and the retail side, we may get $1 billion, and that-that sounds like a lot of money. But at the end of the day, after 10 years, you sold your asset, you marginally increased, maybe, your revenue. But at the end of the day, at the end of 10-12 years, you’ve got nothing to show for it. You’ve lost the benefit of the ongoing, $80-$100 million worth of revenue.
Bill: That’s exactly what I wanted to know. I wanted to say, okay. If you sell it, and you say, wow. We’re going to make $1 billion in 2015—
Senator Jay Costa: Today.
Bill: …Today. What about two years from now?
Senator Jay Costa: Two years from now, you don’t have the $1 billion. But more importantly, you lose the benefit of the $80-$100 million that’s coming into your budget every year. So, we can’t sell—I don’t think it’s appropriate to sell this particular asset, to protect, or-or to sell this asset to drive the—solve the budget gap.
Bill: It’s a one crack deal.
Senator Jay Costa: It’s a one shot deal that I’m concerned about. But, I will say though, I think the question also rises, should Pennsylvania be in the business of distributing alcohol? And I answer that question, yes. It’s not a core function of government. Clearly, it’s not. But I do believe that there’s an appropriate role for the Common Wealth to be engaged in the dispensing of wine, and spirits, as well as beer in our bars, and our restaurants, and our wine and spirit shops. There’s a level that needs to be there, and what we believe with our modernization plan, we’re moving more towards the appropriate level as to where we need to be. I think that’s what you’ll see us discuss.
Bill: And as somebody once pointed out to me, when was the last time you heard of an armed robbery at a Pennsylvania liquor store?
Senator Jay Costa: Yeah, yeah.
Bill: Because as far as safety, and cleanliness, and so on, and so on.
Senator Jay Costa: Yeah, I think they’ve done a tremendous job on the retail side. And I think that’s what we need to recognize. But there’s more that can be done, and we want to do more along those lines, and I think that’s what we have to take a look at. You know, a lot of conversation, I think the public would like to see more access to wine, and beers at their grocery stores. It think clearly that’s going to be part of the discussion, as we go forward. Where it ends up at remains to be seen. But I know that over the course of the past several years, they’ve expanded, for example, the use—the beers. Being able to purchase beer at our grocery stores. That whole concept is starting to expand, and grow. Accessibility is growing, and I think that you’ll likely see it continue to grow, as we go forward. But folks want convenience. Particularly, as it relates to the beer, and wine. And I think that’s where the conversation is heading.
Bill: Now, the big issue: education funding. Public education funding. It seems that every school district in the state, large or small, affluent, not so affluent, have cut to the bone. What are we going to do to increase spending, or the investment, on public education?
Senator Jay Costa: Well, I think it’s important that we recognize that we just can’t throw dollars at education. We have to be thoughtful, and we have to make investments, where we know that they’re going to provide positive results. And what we saw, during the latter part of the Rendell administration, when we were making significant investments in education, we had success. Our test scores revealed that we were a leader amongst states. Pennsylvania was. In fact, we were the only state, one year, where we had an increase in every level of—every grade level had an increase in scores, as well as subject matters. And I think that’s an important thing to recognize. So, when you make the right investments in targeted programs that work, and I think that’s what’s important, you have success. And that’s what we need to be able to do. Clearly, just saying, we’re going to add more money is not the solution. But we have to be thoughtful as we do it.
Bill: Is there a level playing field for every public school student in Pennsylvania, when it comes to how much is being invested? In other words, there’s the old saying, it depends on what zip code you live in, depends on what kind of an education you’re going to get.
Senator Jay Costa: I think that there’s-there’s definitely been an inequity along those lines, for many, many years. At the end of the day, we have to figure that out. So, what we have in place now, last year we passed legislation to establish the Basic Education Funding Commission. I think it’s 15 members, and Senator Max Smith from Allegheny county is our choice—our person, who’s serving on that commission for us. Doing a great job. Along with Senator Rob Teplitz, here from Dauphin county. And I think that those two members, along with their colleagues are doing—examining this issue. What is the right formula, quite frankly, in terms of how we drive our resources to our school districts? Taking into consideration a whole host of factors, that maybe in the past we haven’t taken into—and maybe it’s been more of a politicized funding formula that we need to get away from that. Be a little more thoughtful, and-and be serious about how—what factors we—what-what variables we put into that formula.
Bill: Is the formula, as it stands now, potentially broken?
Senator Jay Costa: I think that—
Bill: Or does it need to be tweaked?
Senator Jay Costa: It needs to be addressed. It needs to be modified, and again, the question becomes, what variables do you want to put into that formula? And at the end of the day, you know, how much strength—or how much weight do you give poverty? How much weight do you give to tax base? How much weight do you give to population? Or whatever those criteria—you know, growing school districts, versus getting school districts that are getting smaller. How much weight do you assign to those variables, helps you with at least the conversation that’s taking place right now. And my hope is that they’ll come out with a formula that I think folks can agree upon, and that we implement. And it addresses some of the inequities that exist, as we go forward. You’re always, however, going to have inequities, as it relates to the ability—the local share of the school districts’ ability to pay. More affluent school districts are able to make more investments to other tax, and—you know, property taxes, and the like that will exist in those communities that help-help, you know, create some of that inequity. And we have to figure out a way to-to—figure out a way to balance it better, as we go forward. And that’s a discussion that’s going to take place, now.
Bill: I know. I know, in the next month or two, the Senate’s going to shine. And I know that temperatures are going to increase. And when they do, the dirt is going to fly, as far as infrastructure in concerned. Highways, bridges. Interestingly enough, it was just 60 Minutes a couple of months ago, did a piece on Pittsburgh being the number one city in America with the greatest number of bridges that need to be repaired, in many cases, too. How important is this new transportation bill?
Senator Jay Costa: It’s hugely important. It’s going to create a tremendous number of jobs. It’s what we talked about, with the $2.5 billion investment in year five, which is three years away. We will likely have grown about 62,000+ jobs. But, also, what it has done, is it addressed a public safety need. Which I think is equally important. The fact of the matter is our bridges, while they’re operational—operable, at the end of the day, there are safety concerns. There have been weight restrictions, and weight limitations, and the like. Those will be removed, so you have full access to these roads, and bridges in particular. So, I think at the end of the day, it’s going to be hugely important. It’s going to fix our infrastructure, provide for safe roadways, but at the same time create jobs that, again, put people to work, people spend money, they pay taxes, and it works to benefit the Common Wealth, because then we take those resources and then drive them back out to provide services.
Bill: You’ve literally, physically, have stood underneath some of the bridges in Pennsylvania. You have literally stood underneath some of them that you personally drive across almost on a daily basis. Were you stunned to see what—when you’re looking up, underneath?
Senator Jay Costa: Yeah. Well, we had a couple of major bridges. I mean, we had a very near catastrophe a couple of years back, with the Birmingham Bridge, where one of the-the foot, so to speak, sort of shifted and came off its bearing—the mooring of the foundation. That’s been resolved, of course. But that’s one of the bridges that will be worked on very soon. Some of the issues, there. The Liberty Bridge, major, major thoroughfare coming out of Liberty Tunnels, and connecting downtown to the South Hills, is in very serious condition. Very serious need for rehab, and that’s also one of the main bridges. So those are the two that I can think of. But you know, we also got to think there’s a lot of small bridges there, as well. You know, those little bridges that run over our highways, that may not be very wide, or may not be very long, but they’re critical parts of the infrastructure system, and our transportation system that need to be addressed in shored up as well. And you’re going to see that take place, as well.
As well as our roads that need to be addressed. I mean, we’re going to be fixing a lot of our roads, widening a lot of the things. Things along those lines that, again, plans and projects that have been on the books for a long, long time, as part of the 12 year plan. That we’ve—it’s been taking us a lot longer to get to, because the limited number of resources. So, now we have the opportunity to get to those projects sooner, and quicker, and I think that helps us. And our hope is, that our colleagues at the federal level will soon provide us with a federal transportation plan that allows us to mix the dollars. The state, and federal dollars to do even more.
Bill: Isn’t it true, at the federal level, the gas tax—or the gas excise, or whatever you want to call it, hasn’t been raised in years? At the federal level. So, that would have a huge increase.
Senator Jay Costa: Yeah, that would.
Bill: A huge impact, I should say.
Senator Jay Costa: Yeah, it would—You know, I’m not sure how they would want to pay for it, but at the end of the day I think the bottom line is that investments in infrastructure need to take place. Not just in Pennsylvania, but across the country. I think we’ve heard loud, and clear form folks. And-and also, you know, what that does, and what a lot of folks don’t realize about the transportation plan that’s in place in Pennsylvania, the impact that it’s had on transit. Particularly in Allegheny county, and southeastern Pennsylvania.
Bill: Public transportation?
Senator Jay Costa: Public transit. So, I think that’s a major issue, as well.
Bill: Just a couple of minutes left. Let’s talk about some other issues. What do you see as number one priority, as the legislature continues in this, as we approach a new fiscal year?
Senator Jay Costa: I think our number one priority is figuring out our-our fiscal status. How we go into to fix the financial status of this Common Wealth. As I mentioned earlier, we’ve had three bond rating downgrades, which means that the bond rating agencies do not have confidence in our ability to manage our fiscal situation, here in Pennsylvania. That’s a concern.
Bill: And that’s very telling, isn’t it? It really is a slap in the face, isn’t it?
Senator Jay Costa: It really is saying that we don’t believe that you guys are well positioned to do what you need to do, to be able to meet your needs of your Common Wealth. And you don’t have the resources to do it. And we have to have a serious conversation about that. So, that’s one of the things. Fiscal stability is something we have to look at. But, the priority in our—in our minds, in democrats’ minds is going to be a couple things.
Investing in education, investing in job growth, investing in infrastructure, looking at those type of things that are going to grow jobs, put people back to work, and help people be prepared for work. And working with our kids, to make sure our kids are prepared for the future.
Bill: It’s easy to say job creation, but do we have to be innovative?
Senator Jay Costa: We have to certainly be. We have to figure out different ways. We’re competing with folks around the country, but also around the world, in terms of getting businesses to want to come here. Creating an appropriate environment for a business to want anything to be here, come here, or expand here, or grow here. And that’s one of the things that we have to do, as we go forward.
Bill: Any other top priorities, as far as the budget is concerned? Is it a democratic, or a republican partisan issue this year?
Senator Jay Costa: I don’t think so. I think, together, we need to find—we need to solve the fiscal instability that we have in Pennsylvania. But we also heard loud and clear, democrats and republicans talked about wanting—the past campaign, democrats, republicans made it clear that education is a priority. Funding for education should likely come from our Marcellus Shale industry, in part. And that in addition to that, folks need to concentrate on how we grow jobs in Pennsylvania.
Bill: And very briefly, higher education. You heard the President come out with a plan to talk about community colleges. A proud graduate of the Community College of Allegheny County, and also a board member.
Senator Jay Costa: As Treasurer of the Community College, I was thrilled to see the program being recognized.
Bill: I want to ask you about that. What do you think about that?
Senator Jay Costa: My hope is that—they can do—they can do something, there. I think it’s something, what we’ve been seeing in our colleges, a little bit of a decrease, or a decline in enrollment. We have a new president, Dr. Bullock, who has taken great steps to reverse that trend. And we’re pleased to see that. So, we’re swimming, you know, back up—we’re swimming with-with the stream, so to speak. So, we’re doing a good job of resolving that. We have more work to do, but certainly affordable higher education is something that this Common Wealth, we have to talk a lot about. We-we rank very poorly, as it relates to-to cost of higher ed in Pennsylvania. That’s something that we need to address. But, I think we first got to get our arms around our fiscal stability. Make the investments in—you know, K-12, and pre-k, and higher ed, and then figure out how we’re going to grow jobs to be able to sustain what we want to do, as we move forward.
Bill: And on that note, we’re going to wrap it up. Senator Jay Costa, thank you for being here.
Senator Jay Costa: Thank you.
Bill: Thank you for joining us. If you have any questions, or comments, the Senator would love to hear from you. You can follow him on social media. There you have all the information on your screen. Of course, you’re always welcome to call, or visit his district office. Thanks very much for watching.