​Click the links in this sentence for templates on how to mobilize your municipality, local elected officials, or organizations to support!

LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT FAQS 
 
WHAT IS THE PA LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT AMENDMENT? 
 
The Local Self-Government Amendment is an amendment being proposed to the Pennsylvania Constitution in order to empower people and their local governments throughout the state with the authority to enact local laws that protect the rights of people, communities, and the natural environment at the local level. The Amendment would specifically recognize the right of local community self-government in the Pennsylvania Constitution's Bill of Rights. 
 
ARE OTHER STATES PROPOSING A LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT AMENDMENT? 
 
Yes. Colorado, Oregon, and New Hampshire are all proposing Local Self-Government Amendments to their state constitutions. Ohio is also preparing a Local Self-Government Amendment. 
 
WHY IS A STATE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT NECESSARY? 
 
Today, the law elevates the rights of private corporations over the rights of people who live in Pennsylvania communities. Private corporations regularly invoke these rights and privileges when their interests conflict with communities' attempts to protect the local environment, economy and workforce, rural aesthetics, and residents' health, safety and welfare. The Local Self-Government Amendment would empower people and their local governments with the authority to enact local laws that protect the rights of people, communities, and their natural environments over the interests of private corporations. 
 
WILL THE PA COMMUNITY RIGHTS AMENDMENT AFFECT ECONOMIC STABILITY? 
 
Corporate domination destroys stable local/regional economics and forces economic instability. The Local Self-Government Amendment places local economic control in the hands of local people, which improves every measure of environmental and human well-being leading to a long-term economic stimulus. When corporate exploitation of individuals, communities and nature lessens, it will create more room for more diverse, localized small business enterprises to take hold in ways that make them directly accountable to the communities they serve, increasing economic welfare, diversity, and sustainability of communities. 
 
WILL THE PA LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT AMENDMENT UNDERMINE CURRENT RIGHTS AND PROTECTIONS? 
 
No. The proposed Local Self-Government Amendment includes two provisions that limit its scope in this regard. Local laws enacted under the amendment cannot restrict or weaken the fundamental rights of natural persons, communities, or nature secured by local, state or federal constitutions or international law. These provisions ensure that the floor of rights and protections already established by state or federal governments can be built upon but not eroded. 
 
 
WILL THE PA LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT AMENDMENT BAN ALL CORPORATE PROJECTS? 
 
No. Under existing law, corporations can sue state and federal laws to override a community's attempt to protect themselves from corporate projects within their boundaries regardless of local opposition, or environmental harm. The Local Self-Government Amendment confronts this structure of corporate legal privilege by asserting the community's right of local self- government. Under the Local Self-Government Amendment, a community can create local laws that prohibit such projects without interference from corporations or "preemption" by government. If a community chooses not to use their authority under the Local SelfGovernment Amendment, nothing in its local codes or charters will change. 
 
DOES THE PA LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT AMENDMENT CONTRADICT PA OR FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONS? 
 
No. The right of local community self-government recognized by the proposed Local SelfGovernment Amendment can be found within the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution. The right is also embedded in the PA Constitution, which states in Article 1, Section II, "All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness. For the advancement of these ends they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think proper." The PA Constitution has powerful language, but does not specify the right of local community self-government free from state and corporate overreach.  
 
WHAT ARE THE EXISTING METHODS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE? 
 
In the original 1776 PA constitution, county-based representatives could call for amendments. But that authority was stripped out, leaving citizens with no authority to make changes in the way our government operates. Pennsylvania's current constitution (Article XI) places sole authority for proposing amendments and constitutional conventions in the hands of the legislature. To be clear, citizens have no formal process for submitting issues to the voters to consider. The General Assembly (House and Senate combined) has been given the authority originally belonging to the people.

A whiplash of partial victories and partial defeats in the MidAtlantic pipeline landscape remind that partial pathways through existing regulatory structures will never be enough to truly protect communities and the environment from a system of spotty regulation, eminent domain, and corporate rights functioning as designed. 

In the realm of partial victory, on September 10 the Philadelphia federal Third Circuit Court of appeals overturned a lower court ruling, and the ruling of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, to halt eminent domain seizures for the PennEast Pipeline through New Jersey.  PennEast Pipeline Co. representatives insist they are “committed to moving ahead with the project.”  Nonetheless, local groups resisting the pipeline are thrilled to stall it once again.  Similarly, in the ongoing fight against the Mariner East pipeline, residents and advocates alike celebrated the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection’s late August assessment of over $319,000 in fines against Sunoco Pipeline LP for failing to follow clean stream, erosion, and other environmental regulations in its construction sites in ten counties.

However, these partial victories, when seen in the context of the broader pipeline landscape, make clear the desperate need for community rights and rights of nature.  When local political will is lacking, or when Federal pre-emption is asserted, or when the regulatory apparatus functions as designed, as in the late August Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s decision that the Constitution Pipeline in New York can move forward, there is little recourse communities can turn to stop these projects.  Even in the PennEast Pipeline stall "The appellate court said the pipeline still could proceed with a "workaround," and remanded the case back to the lower court."  Battling each individual pipeline in court is a lengthy and expensive process, that can stall, but rarely stop, a project from moving forward.

We can appreciate these short-term victories, and it’s understandable that we try to use existing agencies and courts to protect our communities. But without a constitutional amendment to protect community and environmental rights, these battles will almost always be stop-gaps, rather than lasting protection.  
Furthermore, stalling one pipeline in one town does not help other towns fighting pipelines in other places.   At some point, we must stop fighting environmental harms one at a time, and instead pursue lasting change.

For lasting change, we need a Constitutional Amendment on Community Rights.

​