Pro-Landowner Royalty-Deduction Bill Passes Out of Committee: See how they voted (HB1684)
Yea votes stand with the land owners of Pennsylvania, Nays do not!!!! We landowners need to support those who support us. We cannot forget these people who fight for what's right for the people of Pennsylvania. The fight isn't over yet.
Let's thank Rep. Garth Everett for sponsoring this legislation
Phone: (717) 787-5270
E-Mail: geverett@pahousegop.com
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/RCC/PUBLIC/listVoteSummar...
Views: 14829
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Moldyoak on
-
This is extremely well-stated, Janice. Before we jump all over those who voted 'no,' perhaps it would be more intelligent to ask of their office/staff if they would be willing to explain the reasons they chose to not vote for it. A politician who votes for a bill that he/she *knows* will not stand a constitutional test (which this likely will not, applicable to existing leases) or will not stand a snowball's chance in hXXX of getting through both houses and thence signed, is merely pandering to the pitchfork-wielding populace. How can we know the reasons for the 'nay' votes if nobody bothers to ask? Perhaps they are taking a position based upon idealistic views, as so many here exercise so vociferously, or perhaps there are legal issues involved which they may not choose to support.
Legislation is NOT about making a statement. Statements appeal to news agencies and bombastic journalists! Legislation is about legislating, and taking the time to understand the many facets to an issue and then undertaking a ***legal*** way to effect redress for any such issue in the best interests of ones' constituents.
I do not believe this bill will accomplish in any way what so many people desperately need it to accomplish. Perhaps the nay voters feel likewise and are exercising some bona fide principle in the wishful hope that aspects of HB1684 - which surely will provoke serious legal challenges - can be revisited and perhaps cured in some other manner?
Pitchforks certainly are much more dramatic.
-
Permalink Reply by Darlene Newton on
-
Are you a lawyer?
-
Permalink Reply by Darlene Newton on
-
Politician? Obviously a Nayer!
-
Permalink Reply by Moldyoak on
-
Very typical response, Ms. Newton. If you hear something with which you do not agree nor care to hear, simply aggressively insult the messenger. Ranting and raving and shouting everyone down does not - nor will ever - make something valid and will certainly not bring your apparent wish to drive Bradford County back to the years of being an economic dead zone to fruition. So since you feel free to assume my motives, I suppose I should return the favor and assume yours. You acted foolishly and rashly and signed on the dotted line, thinking you were smarter than corporations which have operated in the same manner for decades. You saw dollar signs and damn the consequences, with no thought to patience and pre-planning, and now it has come full circle to very forcefully bite you upon your rear end. You have deflected any sense of personal responsibility by plastering the gascos as evildoers and hanging your excessively brazen shingle of 'scapegoat' upon them, hoping that by yelling loud enough and often enough you can entice others into tacit agreement. Finally, since I have called into question the constitutionality of the initial drafts of HB1684, you have decided that my opinion as a Bradford County resident and landowner is of no value because it conflicts with your own. How very grand of you, you who waste no opportunity to loudly proclaim your decency here on a repetitive basis.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Darlene Newton on
-
Oh good point Janice I agree
-
Permalink Reply by daniel cohen on
-
Nice addition JIm. To go back even further, in the old agreements between mineral owners and oil/gas companies in Penn., there was an understood-but not written-agreement that what was agreed upon as royalty payment was it-period. This goes back to the 1800's and has a particular reference to that concept which sadly escapes this old head for now-but it did/does exist.
Currently, there are challenges being mounted by law firms claiming no deductions are permitted-period. (I believe that the law firm of Douglas Clark is currently in the forefront of that challenge.)
All this just because one can't believe one's word or honor one's commitment. So sad-yet the farm folks who have tried to be good neighbors and to be neighborly have been treated poorly by the companies who see things as 'business'-not neighbors. Therein lies the crunch. So we farm folk need to 'lawyer up' to fight on an even field. What a waste of time/talent/effort-but apparently very necessary.
Dan
-
Permalink Reply by Darlene Newton on
-
Also Dan there is a BIG problem with Mis-Representing the facts of what they were trying to sell Landowners! That is against the Law is it or not? From reading articles from Wall Street , Pro Publica it was known what they were planning on doing to landowners ! This was not an overnight decision for them to do this!
-
Permalink Reply by daniel cohen on
-
Misrepresentation for contract purposes is called 'deceit ' and legally there are ways to combat it. The AG of Penn. is looking into fraud charges that involve this point against the O/G companies. There is the possibility of criminal action, fines, and contract violations that could void the leases involved.
At least that is how I, as a layman, understands the situation. Others more informed will either set me straight or confirm my impressions.
Best,
Dan
-
Permalink Reply by Darlene Newton on
-
Exactly Dan ! It is Fraud and NOT all the people complain are lying. Another point a lot of people in Bradford County did not sign. I know when my neighbors refused Chesapeake said they would take it with or without it! Corbett has signed our State Game Lands, He also bought a brand new HOUSE with OUR MONEY! Oh he forgot where that money came for! ,We have NO ONE watching the Wells in this County and I am sure the ones that are working are overwhelmed with incredible work!! I did not want our Sacred Lands Touched, I have see what Chesapeake has done to the water , the trust and faith of the people is at an all time low!
I think people in this State need to Question EVERYTHING concerning our Game Lands That is a lot of money and are we getting that money?
-
Permalink Reply by robert g. weaver on
-
We refused chkp. more than once but they finally told my husbnd if we did not sign they woud take our gas anyway! That was the deciding factor in the signing of our lease. If we the land owners lied like Chpk. we would be in serous trouble, you bet that lease would be void!
-
Permalink Reply by Darlene Newton on
-
Some one said they were a Board Member? Or the person that has SHARES in Chesapeake Oil and Gas? It seems their views are quite different then a landowner whom does not own Shares in this Company! The ones that say it is going to create Law Suits , It will not fix anything seem to be the people that say that! A person that has alot of money has the capabilty to write off any loses, nor do they want to claim anymore income would they, I would think? An ordinary middle class person is not capable of that!
To me that PATH is an Obvious PATH one more step to steering the middle class Americans to poverty! My personal views, I will not go down with out a fight! Being quite never solved anything! Nor did being nice!
Call Chesapeake and ask them to define each and every deduction term in your royalty check, and Contract they ignore you! Why? Tell me guys Please? They should be more than willing if they have done nothing wrong to explain! Only the Guilty avoid, ignore, lie, ............to People that want answers!
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMmmmmmmmm
Top Content
Latest Activity
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
