We close the Minnesota chapter of the “Advocating on the Road” blog series with this reflection by Kate Gaskill, ELCA Washington Office. 

“We are all beggars.  This is true.”    – Martin Luther

In 1546, a dying Martin Luther scribbled this sentence on a piece of paper.  It turned out to be one of the final missives Luther would physically write himself.  The man who transformed Christianity and altered the course of world history with his pen ended his career and life with these words.

“We are all beggars.”

In the final days of Luther’s eventful (and often controversial) life, he united all people by saying that before God we are all sinful, in need of God’s grace. Theologians debate the intent and meaning behind this heavily studied statement, but  it is interesting to note that  Luther made this point of common need by identifying all of us as beggars.  He aligned us all as  poor, as outcasts.

Alone we are all beggars in the eyes of God, yet the risen Christ justifies us, lifts us from “beggar” to “child”, from “outcast” to “beloved.”  Through Christ, we are free to live joyfully in God’s grace—and we are free to serve… free to tear down the walls of poverty and inequality that divide our society.  “For he is our peace,” reads Ephesians 2:14, “in his flesh he has made both groups into one and has broken down the dividing wall, that is, the hostility between us.”

It seems so often through our rhetoric and public policy, we distance ourselves from the beggar and we often reinforce walls.  How reluctant are we to unify with all people, and especially the person who is in need?  We often seek to do the very opposite of what Luther acknowledged  on his deathbed.  We don’t want to be thought of as lowly, poor, or in need of help.

Today people who use government assistance—no matter how temporary—are often vilified.  We’ve all heard the rhetoric, and sometimes it even comes from our elected officials.  Parents who rely on state and federal hunger programs for meals are often deemed “lazy.”  Families who must transition to government assisted housing are part of the “problem.”  Children who rely on programs, like the Minnesota Family Investment Program—or SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) or WIC (Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children) “threaten” our nation’s financial solvency.

Therefore, life-saving programs are cut.  Proven effective ways of aiding direct need and creating self-sufficiency are abandoned.  We don’t seem to see the people behind policies… or if we do, we immediately separate ourselves from them.  “They are different than me”, we might say, “They are a beggar.”  We build a wall between ourselves and the others.

But Luther reminds us that in the eyes of God, “We are all beggars.”  How can we separate ourselves from this commonality?  Regardless of socioeconomic status, race, or gender, we are alike in our need for forgiveness and grace—given to us through Christ.  And because of our freedom in Christ, how can we reject Christ’s example of breaking down the divisions between us and our neighbors?

Governments, at their best, can help tear down walls between people. They can be a gift that enables nations to live peacefully with one another and help cycle people out of poverty.  Government programs can aid immediate need all over the world, and government policies can help shatter cycles of homelessness, conflict, and hunger.  But this good government requires participation and direct advocacy from constituents.  It requires action from ELCA members—and our partners—to speak out for just government that serves the common good.

As Christians in the United States, we have unique opportunities to speak out for policies—like the Minnesota Family Investment Program, or SNAP and WIC—that help restore lives.  We also have the duty to reject harmful rhetoric that vilifies, and may even dehumanize, those living in poverty.  We are called to align ourselves with the beggar.

“We are all beggars.  This is true.”

This piece is part of the Minnesota installment of the “Advocating on the Road” blog series.

By Inyene Ekah,
Senior director for employment services,  Lutheran Social Service of Minnesota

I love helping people and was drawn to employment services, because in addition to helping, employment services also empower people to provide for themselves.  At Lutheran Social Service of Minnesota, our goal is to move people from public assistance to self-sufficiency.   I have spent the last five years working with this population and have seen the impact of various public policies both at the state and federal level on these individuals and their families.  Through advocacy, we can help shape these policies that meet immediate needs, help people reach self-sufficiency, and shatter cycles of poverty.  

When provisions of the Minnesota Family Investment Program and related programs were recently highlighted for changes at the state legislature, our office saw first-hand how women, men, and children would suffer if assistance were restricted or impeded. 

Some lawmakers called for routine drug screenings for participants to be eligible for Minnesota Family Investment Program assistance.  While many of the people who come to Lutheran Social Services do not have a drug history, there are those who do have this  history some more recent than others and with varying severity. 

One woman comes to mind — she was a middle-class individual living the American Dream, until her personal issues interfered with her professional life.  This woman was working in a hospital as a registered nurse and had some problems with prescription drugs.  This resulted in losing her job and her house, and soon she was applying for Minnesota Family Investment Program assistance.  She was a single mother of three children. Because of the assistance through the Minnesota Family Investment Program, she was able to move to an apartment with her family and use the cash benefit to pay for rent and the food portion to feed her family.

If this mother had been denied this assistance, as a result of a positive drug test, the impact on her family would have been even more devastating. She was able to keep a roof over her head and feed her family in spite of the personal challenges she was experiencing because the program works.  Her life will be restored because of the temporary assistance given to her and she is on her way to working again and leaving assistance. 

Public programs, like the Minnesota Family Investment Program, should serve as a safety net for people in need, no matter how the need came about.  The need exists, therefore assistance must exist.  My experiences have led me to believe that these types of programs should be available for all who need it.

This piece is part of the Minnesota installment of the “Advocating on the Road” blog series.

Minnesotan Julia Dinsmore has known poverty all of her life and is no stranger to homelessness. Her childhood was marked by frequent moves, chaos and episodes of violence — her mother struggled with mental illness, her father with alcoholism. As an adult, she has struggled to support herself and her three sons through insurmountable medical needs and expenses. “My dream is to earn enough money so I can get myself situated and help my kids and grandkids,” she says.

Julia uses her gifts in creative storytelling, music and poetry to educate others on the effects of poverty. Below is a link to a video presentation of her poem, “My Name is Not ‘Those People’”, which speaks to the importance of remembering the human stories and realities behind issues that are often looked at solely through a policy lens. 

As Christians, we must continually ask ourselves what was asked of Christ: “Who is my neighbor?” We must also ask ourselves, do I think of my neighbor as “the other”? Does my voice, and my vote, build a wall between myself and “those people”?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQWbkVqZKeo&feature=youtu.be

This piece is part of the Minnesota installment of the “Advocating on the Road” blog series.
By Sheila Ehrich

As I have grown older and experienced more of life, I have come to realize how truly blessed I have been. For me, advocacy is something I do out of gratitude. I have always known that poverty, hunger and injustice exist. Over the years I have done what I could to address those issues both financially and with my time.

I grew up in an intact middle-class family. The expectation was that my sister and I would go to college. We both did, and my education at Gustavus Adolphus College served me well in a variety of jobs as well as with the many volunteer and advisory positions I have held over the years.

Following college I married and had two healthy children who have now grown up, gone to college, married, and one has a family of his own. There has always been food on my table (and in my pantry). I have always had clothes to wear, a car that ran, and a job that paid decently – usually with good benefits and a guaranteed roof over my head.

Even after being divorced and now in my current unemployment, I have come to know that I am truly blessed. Advocacy is something I do out of gratitude for all that I have been given – “to those to whom much is given, much is expected.” I also do it because people living in poverty are often so downtrodden – maligned in the press and by politicians and others, that they are sometimes unable to advocate for themselves beyond seeking public assistance.

As part of my job search I often check a number of non-profits to see if they have any openings. This spring I saw that the Lutheran Coalition for Public Policy in Minnesota was looking for volunteer help. I began a two-month opportunity of a lifetime to work almost fulltime at advocacy, advocating with and for people who live in poverty, who seek not a handout, but a hand up. I had the opportunity this spring to advocate for people in poverty, to stand alongside them and say, “I am not a criminal! I am just down on my luck. Please help me.”

Living in poverty in and of itself is very limiting in terms of energy and time. Facing people who have power is intimidating and often frightening. I do have the energy and time – and while many people are intimidated by those who hold power, I am not, so it is my duty to speak up for those who find it difficult, for whatever reason, to speak for themselves.

I have met and gotten to know a number of people living in poverty, some of them even working fulltime. As the recession hit I also saw members of my congregation struggle to hang onto their homes, sometimes not succeeding. They also struggled to put food on the table and to be able to send their kids on for post-secondary education. Some also came to struggle with addiction.

These were not rich people or people who were irresponsible. They were people like me who worked hard, took care of their families and looked forward to life being okay. We have all seen people living in poverty maligned and dehumanized on the news and in person, but over the last few years they have often been seen as criminals.

God calls upon all of us to act for the well-being of the poor and hungry, and those who face injustice whether they live in our Twin Cities’ neighborhoods, a community in Minnesota, or across the globe. Through advocacy, we have opportunities to help our neighbors reclaim their dignity and restore their lives. I believe we truly cannot separate our faith and the grace we have received from doing this aspect of God’s work.

 To join a growing national network of Lutherans advocating for public policy that serves the well-being of our vulnerable neighbors and God’s creation, click here. 

We open the Minnesota installment of the “Advocating on the Road” blog series with this piece.

By Mark Peters, director of the Lutheran Coalition for Public Policy in Minnesota, a State Policy Advocacy office of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America

The advocacy road trip continues, pausing to explore poverty in Minnesota.  In recent years, Minnesotans have heard some policy makers malign people who use government assistance programs. In a scripted YouTube video, one state representative went so far as to compare people who receive benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP- formerly food stamps) to stray animals. After the video went viral across the Internet and on online news sources, the legislator was forced to apologize for this dehumanizing statement. While not all dialogue has sunk to this level, recently officials in the Minnesota state legislature have employed harsh rhetoric to allege criminal behavior and illegal activity among individuals who use social safety net programs.

Minnesota’s primary tool for moving children out of poverty is the Minnesota Family Investment Program. The program seeks to facilitate connections for their parents to work while providing enough income to lift their family out of poverty. All applicants are part of a family with children, and seven out of 10 recipients are children (and half of these children are under the age of 5). More than two-thirds of those turning to the program are women trying to work and care for children. 

The family investment program is crucial in addressing poverty — and its effects on children — in our state. The number of Minnesota children experiencing poverty has grown by 62 percent since 2000. About 4,500 youth are homeless in Minnesota each night, and half of Minnesotans served at food pantries are children. Programs like the Minnesota Family Investment Program help families with children cycle out of poverty: half of the families move from welfare-to-work within one year and 70 percent transition within three years.

During the recent Minnesota legislative session, there were more than a dozen bills proposed that, if passed, would directly and negatively affect families with children served by the family investment program. Among these provisions were denying benefits to anyone with a drug offense in the past 10-15 years and mandated criminal background checks and fingerprinting, paid for by an applicant currently living in poverty who is seeking benefits to support his or her family.

Debate on these bills centered on anecdotal evidence of fraud and abuse in the program, but there is scarce evidence to support these claims. Minnesota Health and Human Services Commissioner Lucinda Jesson notes that, “The majority of people on the Minnesota Family Investment Program do not fit a pattern of fraud, abuse or misuse. They are working, but at very low-income jobs. They have serious health problems which limit their ability to hold a full-time job. They are new mothers or they are recently unemployed as a result of our challenging economic times.”

ELCA members mobilized to oppose provisions that would restrict the ability of our vulnerable neighbors to receive assistance from the family investment program. Two hundred Lutherans gathered at the State Capitol on Annual Interfaith Day on the Hill, with 600 others, to tell their legislators to denounce rhetoric that vilifies people in poverty and impedes access to the program’s services. Minnesota’s six ELCA bishops joined with the six Roman Catholic bishops and archbishop in sending a letter to the governor and legislators in March 2011, arguing that “The most telling measure of how well we care for each other is to consider how we treat those who are the most vulnerable among us.”  Advocates from the Lutheran Coalition for Public Policy in Minnesota testified in both House and Senate Health and Human Services committees, which helped turn the tide of the committee’s decision.

Ultimately none of these provisions to restrict access to the Minnesota Family Investment Program were included in the final bill. Commissioner Jesson thanked the faith community for their advocacy, saying that they played a major role in efforts to reject harmful family investment program restrictions. In April 2012 eight ELCA pastors in the Southeastern Minnesota Synod joined area Lutherans and representatives from local food providers in a meeting with Senate Majority Leader David Senjem. The group thanked Senator Senjem and his caucus, especially members of the Health and Human Services Committee, for listening to the concerns of Lutherans and other faith-based advocates.

Through their visits to the State Capitol and letters to officials, Lutherans in Minnesota urged their legislators to work for the common good. They stood up for civil and respectful dialog, rejecting rhetoric that maligns our neighbors, regardless of their life experiences or personal burdens. Lutherans pushed for fair assistance to those living in poverty, a proven step that helps individuals cycle out of hunger and homelessness.

Keep an eye on the ‘Advocating on the Road’ series on the Voices for Change blog for contributions from Minnesotans in the coming days. 

We close the Pennsylvania installment of the “Advocating on the Road” series with this reflection.

A reflection by The Rev. Paul L. Lubold,

Western PA Advocacy Developer, Lutheran Advocacy Ministry in Pennsylvania (LAMPa)

We hope you enjoyed your “visit” to Pennsylvania, and the discussion offracking.  Lutheran Advocacy Ministry in Pennsylvania (LAMPa) thanks you for visiting us in the “Keystone State,” although Pennsylvania is technically not a “state,” but a “commonwealth.” We are, as William Penn described us, a “grand experiment.”  While the Rev. Amy Reumann was the ‘tour guide’ that got us going, this leg of the ELCA “Advocating on the Road” blog series  was greatly enriched by the interaction of grassroots leaders along the way and we’re grateful for their voices.

I invite you to share in this closing prayer as we leave Pennsylvania, and move on to our next destination.

Creator God, we are among your creatures, recognizing the responsibility you have entrusted to us – as ‘stewards’ and ‘caretakers’ of this planet we call home.  Our current conversation about frackingis both complex and divisive.  It is also of great importance. 

Bless us as we continue to discuss and learn.  Grant us courage to listen to opinions that are different from ours, and openness to see things from another’s point of view.

Allow your faithful people to remember our central identity– our salvation through Jesus Christ – and to gather around his cross, recognizing that our different convictions ought not divide us.

May we more closely resemble the biblical image of “lions and lambs resting together,” rather than opposing forces waging battle.

Hear our prayers.– .for those trying to earn a “sustainable wage” in the petroleum industry, 

for those who live in close proximity, or ‘downstream’ from drilling, 

and for our elected officials as they seek the good of the “Commonwealth” of Pennsylvania and our larger nation.

And for leaders of the faith communities, as the ELCA joins with other church bodies, seeking to discern your holy will. 

AMEN

This piece is part of the Pennsylvania installment of the “Advocating on the Road” blog series.

This month, we learned how hydraulic fracturing is impacting communities across the state of Pennsylvania.  Fracking is happening in many places, and is being proposed in many others, and the issues raised in those states and communities are often quite different than what we’ve seen this month in Pennsylvania.  Because of this diversity, there is probably no “one size fits all” approach that will satisfy all of the concerns of every community, but there are a few issues in common that may merit a common approach. 

We’ve seen through the eyes of Pennsylvanians that drilling for natural gas has the potential to create jobs and generate income in communities where both are limited.  But we’ve also heard that it has made affordable housing scarce, impacted roads with heavy truck traffic, and created conflicts between neighbors over when and where drilling is appropriate.  Fracking raises concerns about water—both underground and in the state’s rivers and streams—and about public health, as people worry about possible exposure to toxic chemicals in fracking fluid and poor air quality around drilling sites. 

Water is a recurring concern in many of the areas where fracking is occurring, with reports of contaminated drinking water wells in nearby communities, and concerns about accidental spills of chemical-laced water and about the amount of water used to frack a single well.  Industry asserts that fracking is not the root cause of contaminated ground water and notes that it is taking steps to cut its use of water through recycling and to cut down on accidental spills.  Community activists believe that fracking is contaminating both underground and surface water and urge that steps be taken to slow the growth of fracking until more is known about its impacts.  They are concerned about the chemicals used in fracking fluid, which are often not disclosed, and about how those chemicals may affect their health.  While some drilling companies voluntarily disclose the chemicals they use,  others press for privacy on this matter,  claiming that the chemical make-up of fracking fluids are trade secrets and that public disclosure would hurt their competitive advantage.

State environmental agencies and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are taking steps to regulate the disposal of used fracking water, to keep chemicals out of rivers and streams.  Currently fracking is exempt from regulation under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, so there isn’t a way to deal with potential impacts on groundwater resources.  The EPA is in the midst of a multi-year, multi-state study of the impacts of fracking on water that may help to resolve some of the uncertainty about the causes of water contamination and could lead to better controls on fracking and on wastewater disposal.  Many of the states where fracking is occurring now require disclosure of the chemicals used in the practice, but the laws vary from state to state. A federal approach to disclosure would provide citizens with more consistent information about chemical exposures and give  a level of certainty to drilling companies, who now have to deal with different regulations in different parts of the country.

There is also a growing concern about how fracking is impacting air quality.  Emissions from wells are contributing to air pollution in rural communities, and the EPA is studying whether current practices, which fail to capture all of the gas flowing out of wells, are in violation of the Clean Air Act.  If well operators are required to capture more of these emissions it would actually increase domestic energy supplies and could prove to be a win for both the environment and for gas companies.

As Rev. Amy Reumann noted in the piece that opened this month of focus on fracking, a lens that we have as  ELCA Lutherans in viewing complex issues such as hydraulic fracturing is the social statements that our church has developed. The “Caring for Creation” (1993) and “Sufficient, Sustainable Livelihood” (1999) social statements call us to seek environmental justice, to protect the health and integrity of creation both for its own sake and for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations, as well as economic justice, to consider how our actions affect the ability of all people to provide for their material needs and the needs of their families and communities.  Looking through this lens allows us to have an honest discussion about the good and bad impacts of fracking on our communities and on creation, and it calls us to a deeper discussion about how and where we get our energy.

As our country struggles to find new sources of energy to fuel our businesses, home and cars, domestic energy sources like natural gas will continue to play an important role.  Each of us consumes our share of our country’s energy resources, and we also share in a responsibility to urge our elected officials to adopt policies that allow our communities to prosper while still protecting our health and the integrity of God’s creation for our benefit and for the benefit of future generations. 

We continue the Pennsylvania installment of the "Advocating on the Road" blog series with these pieces.

Our exploration of fracking in Pennsylvania continues. The next four pieces reflect the experiences of ELCA Lutherans in Pennsylvania as they have felt fracking’s effects in their communities. The complex issues surrounding fracking in Pennsylvania call Lutherans to carefully listen and engage in civil dialogue. The opportunity to learn another’s view on an issue is a gift—understanding various positions helps create a more informed perception and helps create balanced and effective policy. The ELCA Washington Office thanks those who have shared their voice with this national audience.

The views expressed on this blog post reflect the positions of individuals.  No one particular piece presented here represents a formal position of the ELCA advocacy offices and ministries.

Want to share your story with us? Email it to washingtonoffice@elca.org!

When The Neighbors Drill
The Cost of Fracking
Frustration from the Frontlines of Fracking
Fracking at Camp
 

When The Neighbors Drill

By Todd Garcia-Bish, director of the environmental education program, Camp Lutherlyn, Prospect, Pa. and Shayne Garcia-Bish, teacher of hands-on science, St. Luke Lutheran School, Hannahstown, Pa.

After our daughter was born, we decided that we wanted her (and her brother to come) to grow up in the woods, as opposed to the busy road where our former house was located. Our new neighbors are dairy farmers. Over the last four years, we have learned a lot about the life of a farmer as we drive by our neighbors’ farm each day and talk with them fairly often. From what we can tell, farming is a life of just getting by — if you are lucky. For many farm families, the money to be gained from leasing land to drilling companies is a great relief to the financial burdens they bear.

The bulldozers showed up in January 2010. Within a few days, a short road was cleared into a corn field and a level pad was created. A huge drilling rig showed up next and the drilling went on for days. Then the well was hydrofractured (or fracked). During the drilling stage, we were surprised to find that our house actually vibrated, that the noise from the drill half a mile away penetrated our 18”-thick straw-insulated walls.

We didn’t feel as vulnerable as many of our other neighbors may have. The rest of the neighborhood relies on private wells for their water. When we built our home, we decided to build as sustainably as we could, so we installed cistern tanks and  all of our water comes off of our metal roof. Our original reason for cisterns was concern about the pesticides sprayed on neighboring fields that might turn up in our groundwater. Now we feel affirmed in our decision because of the possibility of water pollution from fracking.

Many of the water problems associated with fracking seem to come from two avenues. Sometimes the drilling process enables shallow pockets of natural gas to migrate into aquifers, causing odors, foul taste, cloudiness, and, occasionally, the ability to light your water on fire. The other problem comes from poor containment of the millions of gallons of chemical-laced water used to frack gas wells. Some of this water stays in the ground, and many different contaminants could reach drinking water supplies. The water that comes out of the well, containing toxic substances ranging from aromatic hydrocarbons to radon, can seep into the ground or contaminate surface water supplies if not contained properly.

Our neighborhood has had neither of these problems, as far as we can tell. In fact, within a few weeks all that was left on site were three tanks that receive the gas and water that comes out of the ground. During the summer, it’s even hard to see them over the corn stalks.

However, local water issues are not the only environmental consequences of fracking. Air pollution from gas released at well sites and gases released at compressor stations can significantly affect local air quality. Is the air pollution from our neighbor’s well worse than the air pollution from another neighbor that burns his garbage twice a week? We don’t know the answer to that question, but we do know that western Pennsylvania has a significant air pollution problem and any additional air pollution will only make asthma rates increase.

But the air pollution problem isn’t that clear cut, because in the long run Marcellus gas development may actually improve our air quality. Burning natural gas creates less pollution than burning coal. The burning of coal is the main reason for the poor air quality in the western part of Pennsylvania and if power plants could be switched from coal to natural gas our air quality should improve. Of course, it would improve a lot more if the gas industry would take steps to capture the methane and other air pollutants released by gas wells and compressor stations.

Another consequence of shale gas drilling is fragmentation as wells are drilled in Pennsylvania’s forests. In our opinion, an open field is a much better place for a drilling pad than the middle of a forest The roads and pads provide a conduit for invasive species and break up deep forest tracts that are breeding areas for birds like the scarlet tanager and wood thrush.

As we consider the impact of Marcellus gas drilling on Pennsylvania, it is also important to realize that what we are seeing is only the first stage. In some parts of Butler County, where we live, companies are currently drilling gas wells into the Utica Shale, which is about twice as deep as the Marcellus and may have even more gas reserves. The Utica Shale underlies most of Pennsylvania, so gas wells may be coming to a neighborhood near you.

We also need to consider what we are leaving behind for future generations. Only about 30 percent of the fracking fluids that enter a well actually return to the surface and many of the fluids that are “disposed of” are being trucked to Ohio where they are injected deep<into the ground. What will happen to this polluted water in the future? Pollution from long-abandoned coal mines in Pennsylvania makes us wonder what pollution problem will result down the road from the gas drilling of today. When the gas companies are gone, who will cap the wells and clean up the pollution that no one expected? In the current political and economic environment in Pennsylvania, gas drilling will be a part of our future. There are some benefits to using natural gas, especially to replace coal for power production and to help family farms survive. We as citizens need to make sure that these benefits do not come at too high a cost to our air, water and forests.

The Cost of Fracking

The Rev. Leah Schade
Pastor, United in Christ Lutheran Church, West Milton, Pa.
PhD Candidate, The Lutheran Theological Seminary at Philadelphia, researching homiletics and ecotheology
Co-founder, Interfaith Sacred Earth Coalition

Today I work on the issue of the slickwater horizontal hydraulic fracturing industry (fracking) in Pennsylvania through the Interfaith Sacred Earth Coalition.  The group was born in December 2011 in opposition to the Susquehanna River Basin Commission considering approval of 26 fracking projects that would withdraw over 25 million gallons of water per day from the river and connecting waterways.   The Interfaith Sacred Earth Coalition is a loosely-affiliated network of 70 individuals representing eight different faith groups who believe that care of God’s creation is central to their calling as people of faith and non-religiously affiliated individuals who see a common purpose of protecting the earth and humanity.  We make an effort to hold government, corporate and private citizens accountable whenever suffering and harm to the common good results from our individual, collective, business and industrial actions.

We encourage our fellow clergy and houses of worship to have the courage to address eco-justice issues, listen to the stories of those who suffer and have little or no voice in the public arena, and host public discernment discussions on ecological issues that affect their communities. Our hope is to raise consciousness and offer education about fracking and other eco-justice issues so that citizens may be better informed, advocate for eco-justice issues in the public arena, and offer a positive, creative vision for our planet based on our collective interfaith dialogue. Sacred scriptures and all of our religious traditions give us certain guiding principles — such as respecting and caring for God’s creation, advocating for those who have no voice and no power, and the sharing of wealth and resources. 

Some have questioned our motives in this work, saying that we are against jobs, energy independence and improving the economy. We want to be very clear that ours is not an anti-jobs position. Jobs are a good thing — work is a blessing from God. Rather, we are raising questions about the moral and ethical principles that are guiding the gas drilling industry. We need to have a very serious discussion about how industry claims about job creation, economic growth, and energy independence are blinding us to the reality of suffering and the undue burdens being placed upon individuals, families, communities and generations to come as fracking expands in our state. 

Although fracking has economic benefits, the truth is that it will COST our state and our country in other important ways in the long run.  There is a growing body of scientific evidence that this practice is not safe and will incur more expenses for our country, particularly in regards to water and air pollution.  We seriously question the notion that we need energy from fracked gas to survive, because here is the truth — we cannot survive without clean air and clean water. Water in particular is the foundation for life and is sacred to nearly every faith tradition. Whether you are in favor of fracking or against, we can certainly all agree that there are values we all hold in common that warrant the strictest protection for our country and our citizens. We believe in a God of justice and truth, we call our leaders to accountability, and seeing a vision of a clean-energy future where all God’s children and all God’s creation may thrive.

Frustration From the Frontlines of Fracking

Lisa Beard, Trinity Lutheran Church, New Holland, Pa.
(also Community Action Forum on Marcellus Shale Gas)

My introduction to all things fracking began the summer of 2010 when the Environmental Health committee that I chair in my Lancaster County congregation, decided to host a Marcellus Shale seminar for our community the following year. We knew next to nothing about fracking at that point — just that it was a hot environmental topic — and I eagerly took advantage of the Lutheran Advocacy Ministry in Pennsylvania workshop on the topic that November to learn more. Our event, “Marcellus Shale: A Faith-based Perspective,” was held in February 2011, with over 100 people in attendance, about half of whom were Lutheran. We were surprised to see such a level of interest in a community “downstream” from fracking activity. A significant number of Lancaster countians own property in counties where drilling occurs, so although they may not have felt any reason for concern here at home, fracking was on their radar. 

As a result of organizing this event, I was invited to join a coalition of faith-based, environmental, health/wellness interest groups that formed to help our community learn about the comprehensive impacts of natural gas extraction from Marcellus Shale. We have held several community forums: the first was a general informational forum. Despite a rainy evening, approximately 300 people attended and another 100 had to be turned away. The place was packed — and charged! At that point, people were hungry for information. 

After this first event, we began tailoring our events to specific audiences — church groups and farmers. I originally thought that, here in Lancaster County where farming is such a prominent way of life, the farmers would really want to learn how they could be impacted or stand in support of their fellow farmers throughout the state. But we have not found this to be the case, despite the fact that we brought in speakers who are farmers who have been dramatically affected. I’ve had the opportunity to speak with farmers from both southwest and northeast Pa. and hear their heartbreaking stories of illness in their families and their neighbors’ families, dead and sick cattle, economic loss, plummeting property values, and threats on their lives for speaking publicly about it all. 

We’ve gone from filled-to-capacity forums initially to a seeming disinterest in staying informed of ongoing developments. Living here, without the massive traffic increases or drilling rigs in plain sight, fracking is not commanding the attention it needs. With several pipelines running through Lancaster County, as well as a compressor station, I do worry about the effects we’ll see here.

My focus is now mostly on the health impacts of fracking. As someone who has multiple chemical sensitivities, I learned the hard way about the health impacts of cumulative lose-dose exposures to seemingly harmless chemicals in our environment. After regaining my health, I felt an intense calling to help others avoid the same fate. This is how the Environmental Health Committee of my congregation came to be. It’s been a tough sell — I’ve found that, for the most part, people don’t see a reason to change their perspective until they themselves become directly affected, and so it seems to be with fracking. This is human nature, I suppose, but it can’t be left at that. As St. Paul teaches, “If one member suffers, all suffer together with it” (1 Corinthians 12:26). We have a Christian responsibility to care for our hurting brothers and sisters and to do that, our eyes need to be open to see their needs.  

Fracking is a far-reaching public health concern in the making and for some, it already is one. I feel that it is crucial for all Pennsylvanians to become educated about fracking because of its impacts on the health of humans, animals and God’s creation. It’s also necessary that we voice our concerns because this is something that will affect many people. I continue to stay involved in raising awareness of this issue. I share the stories of those who have already been affected, hoping that it will be embraced as a faith issue and that loving our neighbors as ourselves will prevail.

Fracking at Camp

Camp Agapé is an outdoor ministry of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), providing summer camping programs and retreat facilities to all people since 1961.  The camp is located in southwestern Pennsylvania approximately 35 miles southwest of Pittsburgh, and is owned and operated by the Ohio Valley Lutheran Bible Camp Association.  This rustic site provides a unique opportunity for Christian, and even academic, growth.

Like many organizations in the 2000s and today, Camp Agapé faced financial difficulty in maintaining both their property and the level of programming for campers.   To maintain the ministry, the camp was forced to look to alternate income sources, including the natural gas industry. 
Range Resources, an independent oil and gas exploration and production company, began to drill the first of three vertical natural gas wells at various locations on the property of Camp Agapé in 2007.  These wells extended approximately one mile from the surface and were used to extract natural gas from the underground shale rock formations.  Technological industry advances led to the closing of the three vertical wells and drilling of six horizontal wells on Camp Agapé land. 

The wells are confined to one site of the camp, and Range Resources has been amenable on choosing the location of the wells.  “The trucks used by Range Resources use a separate drive-way and generally do not interfere with programming activity at the camp.  When we expressed concern over an originally proposed drilling location—near the camp chapel—“Range Resources amenably changed the site,” Board President Charlie Wingert describes.   The royalties from the wells are  enabling Camp Agapé to repair an old dam on the grounds, and also helped secure a loan which financed the building of a new Retreat & Learning Center in 2008—something the camp had dreamed of creating for decades. 

This new Center has allowed Camp Agapé to expand its reading and math programs by providing comfortable teaching and learning space for campers and volunteers.  Along with strong faith-based programming (like “Dedicate the Day”—a morning event of sharing scripture, prayer, and praise songs), Camp Agapé offers scholastic opportunities.  The Camp focuses on Math & Reading Camps for five weeks, which attract students who require additional summer support in these subject areas.  Students work with volunteers (at the ratio of one adult volunteer per two students) intensively for four hours each day.  The textbooks used at Camp Agapé include both secular lessons found in public school texts and stories that include Biblical teachings and parables.   “On the reading side, we have seen an average test-measured growth rate of one year in one week for our campers,” says Lavinia Wingert, Camp Director.  Camp Agapé also offers an Art & Science Camp, along with traditional bible camp.  All the camp options—including the scholastic based weeks—include Christian components, like devotions and prayer.

In addition to the Retreat & Learning Center and the programming its presence supports, natural gas royalties have led to the construction of two new large cabins and improved infrastructure on the campgrounds.   The income from the wells continues to supply a significant portion of the Camp’s budget and helps supplement revenue from other sources, including camper fees, gifts from individuals, congregational gifts, and the SWPA Synod of the ELCA.  This economic security allows Camp Agapé to provide extremely reasonable rates to campers’ families and serve more children.  As Camp Agapé looks to the future, they hope to build a playing field on one of the former sites of the vertical wells, and a road extending to their pond on another site.   Most importantly, the gas revenues will enable Agapé to build a strong endowment to provide financial security for the future. 

“We could not do what we’re doing now without the additional income from the royalties,” says Charlie.  “Everything we’ve described would go away without the wells.  We are extremely grateful for the blessing of this natural resource on the Agapé property that enables children to improve their lives while experiencing the fun and fellowship of summer camp.”

Want to learn more about fracking in Pennsylvania and other areas of the United States?  Check out these resources, and keep an eye on the “Advocating on the Road” series on the Voices For Change blog.

Government resources:
Energy Information Administration
Environmental Protection Agency

Industry resources:
America’s Natural Gas Alliance
Fracfocus (a registry of fracking sites and chemical disclosures from industry)

Journalism:
ProPublica
NYT series: “Drilling Down”

Environmental and Citizens Groups:
Earthworks
PennFuture

We open the Pennsylvania installment of the “Advocating on the Road” blog series with this piece.

Pennsylvania is the second stop on the Advocacy Road Trip, where congregations and ministries of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) are in the midst of a new American energy boom. The Keystone State has long been home to energy production, including the first commercially drilled oil well and a long tradition of coal mining. Yet the advent of hydraulic fracturing for natural gas (fracking for short), has caught many unaware as the Commonwealth grapples with the promise, and the perils, of this new industry.

Fracking is a technique used to extract natural gas trapped deep underground in  shale rock formations. A gas well is “fracked” by sinking pipeline into the shale formation, then injecting it with huge amounts of water mixed with sand and chemicals. This action breaks up the rock and releases the gas, which is then brought to the surface. Fracking is currently being conducted in the Marcellus Shale, which covers 70 percent of the state, although accessing deeper shale layers is beginning to be explored.

The drilling debate is deeply polarized in our state, and among Lutherans. Some hail this new, domestic source of energy as a cleaner burning fuel and a bridge from dirtier fossil fuels to cleaner, more renewable sources. Gas drilling activities provide a boost to job creation and a boon for local economies and some landowners during a time of recession and budget cuts. Pennsylvania’s government has welcomed drilling and its benefits, with over 3,300 drilling permits issued in 2010 alone. Several ELCA congregations, camps and social ministry organizations have leased land to gas companies, providing needed income to support vital ministries. Members of our congregations have found employment and economic opportunity through drilling and its supporting industries, particularly in depressed, rural parts of the state, and support its continued development.

At the same time, some Lutherans in drilling areas, and others “downstream” who are concerned with environmental and health issues, are actively calling for a moratorium until drilling’s impacts are better known, or even an outright ban. Many raise grave concerns about the environmental impacts of fracking, particularly its impact on water resources.  Fracking a single well requires between one and four million gallons of water, either drawn from local waterways or trucked into the site. In addition to water, the fracking fluid also contains chemicals designed to help the gas flow from the well, which can include substances known to be toxic to humans and wildlife, including carcinogens such as benzene.  A newly passed Pennsylvania law requires drillers to disclose the chemicals they use in the fracking process to the state, but not the public — they may assert that their fracking formula is a “trade secret” and prevent its disclosure to the public.

After the well is fracked, over a million gallons of fracking fluid returns to the surface, and may also be laced with corrosive salts and radioactive elements like radium found underground. Progress is being made in recycling fracking fluid to use in other wells, but there continue to be accidental spills in transport and overflows from holding ponds. And much of the fracking water remains underground, with ongoing debate as to its long-term implications for the safety of groundwater supplies.

Until recently, drillers were hauling  much of their fracking waste water to local sewage treatment plants, which are not equipped to remove drilling contaminants. In addition, there are numerous reports of the contamination of water wells in proximity to fracking sites, most famously in Dimock, Pa. Accidental spills and overflows of fracking waste water from holding ponds and during transport have all raised alarms. Chemicals believed to be related to fracking have been detected in rivers that provide drinking water to downstream communities in Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Harrisburg and beyond.

Fracking affects more than water. Clearing of land for roads and pads and laying pipeline impacts wildlife and human habitation.  Currently a third of state forest lands are leased for fracking. Testing is being done to determine air quality impact from drilling sites, especially when wells are “flared” to burn off gas. Increased heavy truck traffic impacts local roads and air quality.

The human community has also suffered from the rapid spread of fracking in Pennsylvania. Disparities and tensions exist between landowners who signed leases early for several hundred dollars per acre and those who signed more recently for many times more. A practice known as “forced pooling” and prevalence of land titles that exclude mineral rights means that those who choose not to lease may still have fracking underneath their feet. The volume of workers brought from outside the state has escalated rents in drilling areas, making affordable housing hard to come by, and has brought tensions between locals and newcomers.

Pennsylvania is the only state among the top 15 gas-producing states without an extraction tax on natural gas. After years of wrangling over this issue, in February 2012 Governor Corbett signed into law a compromise in the form of a low “impact fee” that counties may decide to collect and use at the local level for drilling-related impacts (such as emergency preparedness, spills, roads, housing and environment). The law is currently being challenged due to its preemption of local drilling ordinances. Townships and municipalities are required to allow drill rigs in all types of zones, except for densely-populated areas. It sets state standards for the minimum distance between wells and schools, buildings and water sources. If a local government passes ordinances and regulations that go beyond the new standards, the municipality may be barred from receiving any impact fee money.                                   
                              
Any conversation about fracking needs to include not only the costs and benefits of the process itself but the larger context of our use of and reliance on fossil fuels and the potential of natural gas as a “bridge fuel” to the development of alternative energy sources.

The complex issues surrounding natural gas drilling call Lutherans to moral deliberation about this practice and its impacts. This deliberation might include the ELCA social statements on caring for creation and economic life. More important, the issue of fracking is an opportunity to listen closely to what Lutherans are experiencing in communities across Pennsylvania and to decide upon collective responses.

 
– Rev. Amy E. Reumann, Director – Lutheran Advocacy Ministry in Pennsylvania