< Back

Affordability

As a working 33-year-old, I am intimately aware of how the cost-of-living crisis is affecting younger generations. I too am struggling; despite maintaining consistent employment, I have regularly needed the support of family, friends, and state services in order to have shelter, keep my car on the road, and receive medical care.

For my part, I don’t mind working hard. But it shouldn’t be this hard to survive in PA.

My experience is far from unique. The majority of Americans do not possess assets, and wages have not kept up with inflation and rising prices. Until we address the underlying policies causing increasing economic disparity in our region, this will continue to be a critical problem.

While many of our economic hurdles are being created at the national level, there are proposals we can employ to better position Pennsylvanians for success.

  • Senate democrats have rolled out a legislative slate which seeks to improve the wellfare of Pennsylvanians by:

    These are all hugely important initiatives, and I very much support their implementation.

  • While Pennsylvania legislators have received an automatic cost of living adjustment since 1995, the minimum wage here in Pennsylvania has remained fixed at $7.25 since 2009, when the federal minimum wage was first implemented. We tie for last with 19 other states for having the lowest minimum wage in the nation.

    It is manifestly unfair for elected officials to give themselves an annual cost of living adjustment without doing the same for the poorest wage earners in the state. If we can’t afford to pay our poorest workers a living wage, then we can’t afford to pay more for leaders who already have it too good.

    I will propose legislation requiring any legislative cost of living adjustments to be applied to the minimum wage. This legislation isn’t going to solve wage stagnation on its own - it’s going to take a lot more than that to get them where they need to be. What it will do is incentivize legislators to actually attend to the problem - it provides a strong personal motivator to make the minimum wage as high as the General Assembly can square with their constituency.

  • Utility bills are a real problem right now - the unlawful war in Iran and the encroachment of data centers are ramping up the price of fuel and the demands on our grid. Energy costs were already too high - now they are intolerable. Fortunately, there is some important legislation in the works which I stand behind.

    House Bill 2333 – the Return to Ratepayer Protection Act – improves on what’s worked for decades to protect consumers. The act would make sure:  

    • Ratepayers aren’t charged more to offset delinquent accounts.  

    • Delinquent ratepayers working with utilities on payment plans are protected from shutoffs, and winter shutoffs are remain prohibited.

    • Account holders behind on payments will get better information, earlier information, and will be notified using multiple methods. 

    • Lower-income households will have more flexible payment options, and fees will better reflect what people can afford.

    • Water, Sewer, and Gas authorities will have better tools to keep services running while working with customers on payments.

    Rep. Heather Boyd and Rep. Liz Fiedler’s House Bill 2131– the Fairness in Retail Electricity Act – protects consumers who took part in the state’s Electric Choice program but ended up paying higher rates than if they had stayed with their default “home” utility and were unknowingly reenrolled with higher rate providers when their contract ended. Customers like you paid more than $2 billion you didn’t have to pay.  

    The Fairness in Retail Electricity Act would: 

    • Return customers to the local default service provider when a contract with an outside provider ends. 

    • Prevent retail energy sellers from automatically enrolling customers into a month-to-month variable plan. 

    • Make sure customers can still choose to shop for electricity.  

  • Our country struggles with inequitable wages, and South Central Pennsylvania is no exception.

    Economists frequently measure inequality using the Gini coefficient, a scale from 0 to 1 where 0 means perfect equality and 1 means all wealth sits with one person. PA’s 34th districts trail the national average of 0.49, which is very high relative to other developed nations.

    As identified by the World Happiness Report, prosperous countries with low Gini coefficients share a common approach: they use progressive tax systems and crack down on tax avoidance, ensure fair wages and safe working conditions, guarantee broad access to healthcare and social services, invest in anti‑poverty programs, and build governments that are diverse, transparent, and trusted.

    These are exactly the areas where Pennsylvania must do better. If we want South Central PA to be a place where everyone - not just the corporate elite - can build a secure life, we need to commit to the same principles that make more equitable societies possible.

  • Recent global instability has underscored a hard truth: America’s transportation system remains highly dependent on global oil markets and fragile supply chains. As a result, many of us are hurting both at the gas pump and the auto shop.

    But the real problem goes beyond rising costs. South Central Pennsylvania functions as a regional infrastructure hub, yet it lacks the modern transportation network needed to support that role. Overreliance on personal vehicles forces households to shoulder rising vehicular expenses while leaving many residents (especially those without access to a car) bereft of reliable ways to get to work, school, or essential services. This is especially threatening for people who require frequent medical treatment.

    I’m very interested Pennsylvania directing construction towards the development of better transportation infrastructure. In particular, I am eager to explore the platform proposed by Transit For All PA. Summarily, it seeks to:

    • Generate $1.65 billion annually, replacing Act 89’s transit funding

    • Expand and maintain transit while allowing local governments to add (but not replace) funding.

    • Promote flexible spending.

    • Expand public ownership of infrastructure.

    • Build using union labor.

    • Transition to clean, electrified fleets that support good jobs.

    • Create equitable access and community development by funding low-income fare programs.

    • Invest in bike and pedestrian connections.

    • Promote affordable housing near transit.

    This is a forward-looking investment in mobility, economic resilience, and public health. By strengthening transit in this way, we can reduce household transportation costs, improve access to essential services, and build communities that are more connected, sustainable, and fair.

  • Rural communities oftentimes have limited access to high-speed internet, which is important for remote work, education, and overall quality of life. Under President Biden, federal grant programs were sought to support the installation of fiber-optic cable, which is the fastest and most reliable technology. Satellite connections have lower upfront costs, but can be more expensive for customers and can’t offer the same maximum speeds as fiber. Nevertheless, Donald Trump overhauled the federal program, reducing our future grants and doubling the number of locations Elon Musk’s SpaceX satellites will cover. As a result of the latest changes to the grant awards, Pennsylvania anticipates spending $711 million on connecting nearly 130,000 homes to high speed internet - a far cry from the $1.1 billion originally allocated to the commonwealth for the task. The president’s decision is cronyism at its most glaring and is not in keeping with the objectives of Pennsylvania.

    In my cursory research, I wasn’t able to find any resources detailing what state funds Pennsylvania contributes to providing high speed internet to rural areas - we seemingly exclusively use federal funds. The reduction in those grants has caused some contractors have started turning down work in Pennsylvania due to a poor calculated return on investment.

    Without additional federal funding, installing fiberoptic cable competes with other commonwealth appropriation budgetary items. We must advocate for the restoration of that funding.

“Be the change you want to see happen.”
— Diane Kennedy Pike