|
Obama Gets Closer to Signing Keystone XL
by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700
Copyright
January10, 2015
All Rights Reserved.
President Barack Obama faces a fork in the road in
the last two years of his lame duck presidency, deciding what to do with the
Keystone XL pipeline. Since vetoing
the measure in 2012, it’s been a wasteful political hot potato, polarizing
Democrats and Republicans at the expense of Washington gridlock. When the bill reaches Barack’s desk again next week once it’s passed in the U.S. Senate,
Obama will be forced to make a fateful decision:
More gridlock or some token bipartisanship. All the phony environmental
arguments were tossed out with a bogus lawsuit in Nebraska trying to block the
pipelines expected path.
Threatening a veto last week, White House spokesman Josh Earnest cited the
lawsuit as the primary reason for the president’s possible veto. Now that the lawsuit’s tossed out
Jan. 9, Obama has run out of excuses to veto the Keystone Xl pipeline..
Only one of the four legs of the Keystone XL remains running pipe from
Hardisty, Alberta, through Baker, Montana and Steele City, Nebraskto to Houston,
Texas bringing 800,000 barrels of TransCanada’s tar-sands crude oil to the Gulf
for refining. Obama’s argued that
it only brings temporary jobs to the U.S., mostly benefiting the Canadian oil
industry. When you consider the
pipeline would save incalculable amounts of diesel truck pollution traveling
from Alberta to Houston, let alone wear-and-tear on American Interstates, the
pipeline is the best environmental decision to save untold tons of carbon
emissions in the atmosphere.
Battling Republicans on Keystone XL has become counterproductive for Democrats,
viewed more partisan than stewards of the environments. Opponents like Sen. Chuck Schumer
(D-N.Y.) have done more harm to the Party fighting Keystone XL than protecting
the environment.
When the 2016 Election heats up later this year, the big question asked
will be whether or not a two-party system can survive. With Democrats shellacked in the
Midterm election Nov. 4, handing Republicans a decisive majority [54-45], Obama
and Democrats must swallow hard, giving into some GOP projects. While the GOP would like to repeal
Obamacare, they know that would face a certain veto. When it comes to the Keystone XL,
there’s nothing on principle Obama loses by backing he project. Vetoing the pipeline again would
have far more fallout to Democrats than passing it. Vetoing Keystone XL, once it gets
through Senate, would backfire for Democrats, giving the GOP more talking points
heading into the 2016 election.
Republicans want to force a vote because they know the White House has lost any
real reason to veto it other than ugly partisan politics.
Without any concerns about the Keystone XL pipeline’s route, the White
House lost it major argument for a veto.
“It’s time for the State Department and the president to make a decision
on the Keystone XL pipeline—however they decide—because six years is beyond long
enough,” said Sen. Heidi Heilkamp (D-N.D.), one of the Democrats’ key backers. Opposing the Keystone XL so
vociferously, Democrats have made the change of heart into a political defeat. Democrats need to cut their losses
on Keystone XL and show voters they can find common ground with the GOP. Bringing 800,000 barrels a day from
Calgary to Houston along a 1,179 stretch of pipeline would put more refined
petroleum product on the market without the shipping expenses or pollution
expected from trucking oil the same distance.
Democrats have run out arguments to block the Keystone XL.
Before the next presidential election cycle, Obama needs to cement some
bipartisan legacy. His March 23,
2010 Affordable Care Act was forced down Republican throats without any
bipartisan consensus. Passing
Keystone XL would help Obama with other legislative wishes, especially his
recent move to normalize relations with Cuba.
Passing Keystone XL might stave off fierce GOP opposition to restoring
diplomatic relations with Cuba.
Staunch opponents to ending the Cuban embargo like Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fl.)
might cut the White House some slack by showing concessions on Keystone XL. “A vote against Keystone sends a
signal that our government is taking the science of climate change and risk
analysis seriously,” said Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), giving the old feeble excuse
to veto it. Preventing truckers
from spewing diesel pollution from Calgary to Houston only helps climate change.
Obama faces a tough but fateful decision when the Keystone XL gets to his
desk next week. If he vetoes the
bill, he’ll galvanize more gridlock and hurt his agenda in his final two years
in office. Vetoing Keystone XL will
hurt every Democrat’s chances of holding onto the White House in 2016. Vetoing will prove to voters
that Democrats can’t get anything done with a Republican-controlled House and
Senate. “That would show some
willingness on his [Obama’s] part to start working together,” said Sen. John
Hoeven (R-N.D.), referring to the
president letting Keystone XL go ahead.
When you look at the pros and cons, Keystone XL gets more oil to Gulf
refiners with less pollution from trucking product over the same distance. However it benefits a good neighbor
like Canada, Keystone XL help American consumers by keeping energy supplies high
and pump prices low.
About the Author
|
