Rep. Joe D’Orsie (R-Manchester) has explained his decision to vote against the overall Fiscal Year 2025-26 General Appropriations budget bill in Pennsylvania. In a statement, D’Orsie acknowledged that the budget includes some measures he supports, such as withdrawing from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), permitting reform, and increased scholarship funding for economically disadvantaged schools.
“Although this year’s budget package includes some key wins for Pennsylvanians, like the bona fide withdrawal from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), substantive permitting reform and an increase in economically disadvantaged schools (EDS) scholarship monies, in the end I could not support a budget that spends nearly $6 billion more than projected revenues. All things considered, and despite my opposition to major pieces of this package, I am pleased that the General Assembly finally delivered a budget, albeit several months late,” D’Orsie said.
He cited concerns about spending exceeding projected revenues as his main reason for opposing the bill. “Math was really the deciding factor as I compared this budget’s pros and cons. The $50.1 billion spend number tracks at $5.7 billion over projected revenues, setting the stage for probable future tax hikes and continuing a very dangerous precedent of spending beyond the Commonwealth’s means,” D’Orsie stated.
D’Orsie also highlighted what he considers positive outcomes of exiting RGGI: “Arguably the most positive aspect of the budget is the Commonwealth’s exit from RGGI. This job- and opportunity-killing pact, that then-Gov. Tom Wolf illegally entered the Commonwealth into years ago, has been the bane of Pennsylvania’s most vital industry: energy. Withdrawal from RGGI will likely spell significant growth in our energy sector, a much-needed change of pace for a state with such rich stores of natural gas and coal.”
On education funding changes within the budget package, D’Orsie expressed concern about reductions to cyber charter public school funding while noting increases to traditional public education budgets and support for literacy initiatives: “On the flip side, the budget drastically cut cyber charter public school funding, which will translate to thousands of K-12 students losing education programs, teachers, support staff or even their school. In tandem with cutting cyber charter funding, the budget increases brick-and-mortar public education by $1 billion and follows the same trajectory we’ve seen in recent years: massive amounts of largely unrestrained cash flowing into school districts, with little return on investment in terms of improved student success. One positive note, however, is adoption and implementation of ‘Science of Reading’ curriculum. This evidence-backed method for literacy is something I’ve advocated for since taking office, and I feel this is a great step to improve reading proficiency in our state.”
He noted that Medicaid reform was not significantly addressed but said there were initial steps taken against fraud in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP): “The budget also failed to tackle Medicaid reform in any consequential way but did include important first steps to clamp down on benefit fraud and misuse in SNAP.”
D’Orsie pointed out two increases within executive offices’ budgets—one expanding digital experience staff by 40% ($3.3 million) and another increasing funds for legal counsel who previously shielded an aide accused of misconduct.
The complete budget package consists of five bills: one setting annual spending levels (General Appropriations) and four supplemental bills defining how funds are used—including Education Code, Human Services Code (which aims to limit SNAP fraud), state-related university funding bill, and Fiscal Code (which contains provisions withdrawing Pennsylvania from RGGI).
D’Orsie voted “yes” on both Fiscal Code—because it withdraws Pennsylvania from RGGI—and Human Services Code due to its steps toward limiting SNAP fraud.
