There’s A Definite Discrimination Aspect To Pennsylvania’s Smart Meter Law

By Catherine J. Frompovich

What’s discrimination?

But in the context of civil rights law, unlawful discrimination refers to unfair or unequal treatment of an individual (or group) based on certain characteristics, including:… [1] [CJF emphasis]

[U]nequal treatment of persons, for a reason which has nothing to do with legal rights or ability. Federal and state laws prohibit discrimination in employment, availability of housing, rates of pay, right to promotion, educational opportunity, civil rights, and use of facilities based on race, nationality, creed, color, age, sex or sexual orientation. The rights to protest discrimination or enforce one’s rights to equal treatment are provided in various federal and state laws, which allow for private lawsuits with the right to damages. There are also federal and state commissions to investigate and enforce equal rights. [2]   [CJF emphasis]

What are some synonyms for discrimination?


prejudice, bias, bigotry, intolerance, narrow-mindedness, unfairness, inequity, favoritism, one-sidedness, partisanship;  [3]

How many types of discrimination are there?

According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [4], there are 12 examples on their website, one specifically being harassment!  Even though the EEOC’s website addresses harassment as applied to employment situations, certain harassment tactics stand out as ‘classic’ in other areas of life too:

Harassment is unwelcome conduct when….2) the conduct is severe or persuasive enough to create a work environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive.  [4] [CJF emphasis]

Now let’s tie all the above together and apply discrimination to those who are being forced to take AMI Smart Meters against their will, especially in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, where some BIG time discrimination is taking place no one at the PA PUC probably thought anyone would take notice.  Living one’s life according to one’s credo is a civil right and just not for certain races!

Nevertheless, here’s the discriminatory part of the AMI Smart Meter fiasco in Pennsylvania:

According to Act 129 (2008), which is what the PA PUC cudgels over every utility customer’s head, the discriminating problem is that not all Pennsylvanians are mandated by law to have an AMI Smart Meter!

Only the customers of utilities that have 100,000 or more customers, which means only 7 electric distribution companies [EDCs] in Pennsylvania are mandated to install AMI Smart Meters!

By the way, here are the PA PUC’s licensed electric suppliers in what looks like hundreds, maybe thousands.

What gives?

Why are all the other utilities customers exempt from mandated smart meters, when customers of only 7 EDCs are discriminated against for receiving unbearable harassment techniques as exemplified in the article “The Totalitarian New World Order Tactics Of The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission” when customers exercise their constitutional rights and refuse living under constant assault and battery by a totally unsafe technology that has not been studied for short- or long-term non-thermal radiation wave adverse health effects when 32% of microwave industry studies found non-thermal adverse effects?  Microwaves run AMI Smart Meters!

Furthermore, PA PUC’s AMI SM mandate—not the PA state legislature or Act 129 of public record—demands Pennsylvanians so discriminated against will be forced to live in constant fear and/or assault and battery from EMFs/RFs emitted by AMI SMs.  Now apply the feds’ discrimination criteria the conduct is severe or persuasive enough to create” fear, anxiety, undue duress and aggravated medical conditions [5]!

However, there’s a million-dollar legal question:

How can a law be mandatory when, and if, that law does not apply to, or for, all Pennsylvania citizens equally?

When something doesn’t apply to everyone equally, discrimination is present.

PA PUC’s implementation order and regulations for Act 129 make another BIG discriminatory mistake which is:

There is discrimination against 7 EDCs’ customers, who do not have an option to switch to or use another EDC that can provide the non-discriminatory services thousands of Pennsylvanians receive!

Shouldn’t some public interest law firm be looking into the discrimination aspects of the PA PUC’s interpretation of Act 129?

The best way to avoid federal discrimination issues charges would be for the Pennsylvania legislature immediately to pass in to law Opt-Out House bill HB1564, which has 29 co-sponsors.


[3] Google online description

Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.

Catherine’s latest book, published October 4, 2013, is Vaccination Voodoo, What YOU Don’t Know About Vaccines, available on

Her 2012 book A Cancer Answer, Holistic BREAST Cancer Management, A Guide to Effective & Non-Toxic Treatments, is available on and as a Kindle eBook.

Two of Catherine’s more recent books on are Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick (2009) and Lord, How Can I Make It Through Grieving My Loss, An Inspirational Guide Through the Grieving Process (2008)

Catherine’s NEW book: Eat To Beat Disease, Foods Medicinal Qualities ©2016 Catherine J Frompovich is now available

Activist Post Daily Newsletter

Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

3 Comments on "There’s A Definite Discrimination Aspect To Pennsylvania’s Smart Meter Law"

  1. Oh yes, the good old discrimination by regulation trick. Smart meters are very profitable for utility companies and if only the largest ones are mandated, then that also means an unfair marketing advantage for them. No silly 300% increase in rates for the little guys! I always find it funny when people ask for more regulation in an industry. Monopolization is inevitable as that is the purpose of regulation. This acts the same way as far as I’m concerned. It’s a super bonus! Not only do they get to sicken the majority, line the pockets of the corrupt with more fake money, develop the infrastructure well enough to make it mandatory (pushing the little guy out of the picture without a chance to compete), but they get to do it in as obnoxious manner as possible. Isn’t government grand?

  2. next time there is a blackout, you take a hammer and do what needs to be done. can you be charged with criminal destruction if the item is itself illegal?
    rewire, so that when power comes back on it bypasses the meter, which when its backup battery is dead becomes inert

  3. Dear article author, You have written lots of articles with lots of questions, so what are the answers and solutions?

    In PA you can choose your electric supplier, so if you choose to switch from a smart meter mandated utility, does that mean that you can avoid a smart meter?

    Who is going to bring these federal discrimination charges? Who will the charges be against; the PUC, the state of PA, a utility company?

    Perhaps the author should be looking into public interest law firms, to bring the federal charges that she writes about.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.