iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Keystone XL Bill Thwarted By Senate Democrats

Keystone Pipeline

First Posted: 03/ 8/2012 3:54 pm Updated: 03/ 9/2012 3:45 pm

WASHINGTON -- The Senate on Thursday narrowly rejected a GOP provision to fast-track the construction of the Keystone XL crude oil pipeline. The amendment, brought to the floor as part of a larger effort to break a Republican filibuster on the transportation bill, required 60 votes for passage. The vote was 56 to 42.

"Today's vote was a temporary victory and there's no guarantee that it holds for the long run," said Bill McKibben, the founder of 350.org who has led protests against the pipeline since August. "But given that this thing was a 'no brainer' a year ago, it's pretty remarkable that people power was able to keep working, even in the oil-soaked Senate. We're grateful to the administration for denying the permit and for Senate leadership for holding the line."

First introduced by Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D), the amendment would have stripped the State Department of its authority to approve the pipeline, handing that power instead to Congress.

Until recently, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) repeatedly vowed not to consider it as part of the transportation bill unless the transportation bill also included provisions promising the oil, once refined, would be kept in the U.S. The latter amendment, introduced by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) was defeated on Thursday on Republican opposition. The vote was 34-64.

Eleven Democrats bucked President Barack Obama by voting in favor of the amendment. They include Sens. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), Mark Begich (D-Alaska), Kay Hagan (D-N.C.), Mary Landrieu (D-La.), Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.), Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) Mark Pryor (Ark.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Jim Webb (D-Va.), Robert Casey (D-Pa.) and Kent Conrad (D-N.D).

"We had 11 Democrats support our legislation," said Hoeven, noting that two Republicans missed the vote, and that Obama lobbied Democrats to stay with him. "We think that number is going to continue to grow."

House Majority Leader John Boehner at a press conference Thursday afternoon accused the president of "personally lobbying" against the construction of the pipeline.

"I think the White House owes the American people an explanation," he said. "The president said this week that he wants to see lower prices at the pump - at least in an election year. But his own policies are making matters worse and driving up the cost of energy. But by 'personally lobbying' against the Keystone pipeline, it means the president of the United States is lobbying for sending North American energy to China, and lobbying against American jobs."

Republicans have emphasized that the pipeline, which would stretch 1,700 miles from tar sands in Canada to oil refineries along the Gulf Coast, would help improve energy security by making the U.S. less reliant on foreign oil. "This is also about national security," said Hoeven in a statement Thursday on the House floor. Opponents have countered citing the potential for spills as well as damages incurred to the global environment.

Obama rejected a permit for the controversial pipeline earlier this year, putting the $7 billion project on hold pending further environmental review.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- The Senate on Thursday narrowly rejected a GOP provision to fast-track the construction of the Keystone XL crude oil pipeline. The amendment, brought to the floor as part of a larger eff...
WASHINGTON -- The Senate on Thursday narrowly rejected a GOP provision to fast-track the construction of the Keystone XL crude oil pipeline. The amendment, brought to the floor as part of a larger eff...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 7,602
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (90 total)
04:14 PM on 03/19/2012
The Keystone pipeline is not going anywhere anytime soon and nor should it. A project like this could help us in a number of areas but particularly it can help us on the jobs front. The labor that the pipeline would provide is actually not all that different than the infrastructure projects that were put forth by American jobs act back in September 2011 (http://eng.am/xmoh86). Those too were temporary positions with the goal of giving people skills that they could take to other jobs. So creating jobs like these at a time where the US is lagging in growth should be the utmost priority rather than just a passing thought.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
bordway
If you need more than 7 rounds, use a knife.
11:28 AM on 03/13/2012
Not only will this NOT be the grand job creator that the GOP touts it as, but it will have no impact on oil prices either.

http://bit.ly/y6onS0
04:29 PM on 03/11/2012
Look for $5 a gallon gas thanks to Obama. And soon it will be $6 a gallon. He can't hide from these gas prices that is why he is trying to spin. Everyone knows he and Chu want higher gas and energy prices.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
starchildjg24
Balance, Logic and Humor Rule
09:24 PM on 03/15/2012
That is ridiculous! And the truth is that this pipeline would have absolutely no effect on gas prices. But putting it right through the bread basket, the most productive farmland in our country, is ridiculous. The quality isn't even right to be made into gasoline. Facts are a scary thing to you, aren't they!!!!!!

Find me one legitimate source that says the president of the US, ANY president of the US has any control over the price of gas! That is childish thinking.
09:26 AM on 03/10/2012
The cleanup of the tar sand spill in Michigan's Kalamazoo River is still ongoing some 20 months later. It was advertised to be cleaned in just 2 months. This is more than a good indication that no one knows how to handle this stuff in a small scale spills, let alone a major spill. Good reporting by RM last night on this dangerous oil that sinks in water...sickens residents...and might not respond to conventional clean up methods when spilled on land.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:59 AM on 03/10/2012
this issue alone should show how bought and paid for our representatives really are----this is considered to be the DIRTIEST oil in the world---it causes massive environmental destruction to mine it---also takes massive energy to mine it---then the pipeline itself in just its construction is an environmental invasion and destruction of massive scale.not to mention the SPILL possibilities are a reality-----this company has very bad record of not only spills but of lack of response.THEN JOBS-----only the oil company claims big job possibilities---everyone else cant justify oil company numbers and also points out any jobs are temporary.THEN THE BEST PART....we take all the chances and they REFUSE to gaurantee that oil produced here stays here-----in fact they say the opposite----so see how much $$$$$$ is going to the state representitives who want this pipeline in their state------same deal as fracking natural gas---FOLLOW THE $$$$$
06:25 AM on 03/10/2012
The President is personally lobbying against a foreign oil company building a pipeline highway through a major water table of the US for the purpose of transporting Canadian tar sands oil to the Gulf of Mexico for sale on the open market, in exchange for a few thousand mostly temporary jobs.

The profits from this project will go to the foreign oil company and investors in the project, while the potential risk and expense of oil leaks will fall on US tax payers. The temporary jobs created in the construction of the pipeline do not offset the long term risk.

Mr. Speaker has mis-spoken. The oil is to be sold on the open market, and was never intended for the US alone. Our refineries don't even get the production--or the jobs. Once the pipeline is constructed, those jobs are gone. The Speaker knows all this, but will mislead the public anyway, because he has investments that will profit from his deception of the American people he was elected to represent. And he is running unopposed in his district for re-election.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:02 AM on 03/10/2012
thank you for a 100% factual account of how they are trying to screw us as usual
08:26 AM on 03/10/2012
The only thing you and rodnox are missing, is how this lets a foreign company take Americans land by eminent domain.
09:02 AM on 03/10/2012
Thanks for pointing that out. Chalk up one more reason this pipeline has got my feathers ruffled. grrr!
hagenjr
Shovel ready freeborn son of the Republic
02:04 AM on 03/10/2012
We were already facing record gas prices for this time of year prior to this announcement. It is also clear the Saudi's do not support a second term for President Obama and are prepared to let oil prices rise, it is possible we will see $150 a barrel before the election. Rejecting the pipeline would be one thing if he countered it by opening up the natural gas that we have huge qauntities of. In 10 to 20 years all vehicles on the road in this country will run on NG.

Enjoy the $5 a gallon gas this summer. Remember the days before President Obama, on November 3rd, 2008 the national average for gas was $1.72 a gallon.

Voting has consequences. What will a second term do to the price of gasoline? Are you prepared to pay the cost of a second Obama term?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pmoschetta
Where are the Jobs, Speaker Boehner?
05:24 AM on 03/10/2012
We paid the consequences of a Bush second term. Nothing could be worse than that hagenjr
photo
RG41
Blue Liberal Soldier
05:42 AM on 03/10/2012
BS
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:49 AM on 03/10/2012
I am disappointed in my Montana senators vote for this but you have to understand they have little choice. Montana is a red state and Baucus and Tester have to vote for things like this if they want any chance of re-election. I cut them some slack as they do vote for other bills I agree with. Guess that's what is called a compromise today. Something the gop doesn't seem to grasp. The Keystone XL part of MT is a small part of the pipeline so they can pull this off. If Tester opposed this pipeline Denny Rehberg would just have more fuel for his contest and we do not want Denny in the Senate. The country does not want Denny in the senate whether they know it or not. Denny tried out the Tea Party and when they didn't work out he's still looking to the Koch Bros for funding.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:36 PM on 03/09/2012
Whatever. The Southern segment of the Keystone pipeline is being built anyway. When it approaches the gulf coast it branches towards two port/refining areas. The pipeline is here and it's not going away. More hot air and puffery from the ignorati in DC.
photo
RG41
Blue Liberal Soldier
05:52 AM on 03/10/2012
Fuel prices will NOT go down because of it. Canada must be laughing, we are will to allow someone to stretch a long hunk of metal straight across our country in the name of oil independence. The oil will go to the world market and tar sands are very expensive to refine and it is of very low quality. If more than half of America were REALLY concerned about other energy forms (hydrogen, electric, natural gas) and so on we would be way better off as a country. We allow oil companys to feed us BS and we suck it up every time. As China and India put more and more cars on the road world demand increases which drives up oil prices, we are fooling ourselves if we really think that this pipeline would lower oil prices, the republicans try and sell it in the name of jobs. America, mediocre at best.
dem4theday
The Dude Abides.
04:25 PM on 03/09/2012
Thank you for standing up!
03:24 PM on 03/09/2012
Boehner, Reid and their cronies simply want to run this pipeline down our throats so they can stay in bed with big oil's money. Then stand by and blame the president because he is doing his job. Boehner is the poorest Speaker in 100 years. That's right you crying looser, you make Nancy look good!
nonethewyzzer
Master of neither subtlety nor style.....
06:47 AM on 03/10/2012
Yet when, not 'if' but 'when', there is a massive, disastrous, horribly destructive spill from the pipeline... they'll find a way to make it President Obama's fault.
03:04 PM on 03/09/2012
I'd would like to compare the economics of constructing the Keystone pipeline to running a pizza-restaurant which I did for many years. Let's say that you are in a good location, very close to college dormitories and apartment complexes where a lot of young, voracious pizza-eating customers live. Imagine that as the U.S. market to which you can make big, quick, economical deliveries. Now, there is another large market, a small town way, way out there, about 30 miles in the boondocks. But those deliveries take about 2 hours--and a lot of gas--for your drivers to get there and come back. Imagine that is China. And the reason it takes 2 hours is because there's a pond where a ferry charges your driver to transport the pizza delivery car back and forth. Imagine that ferry is an oil barge.

You get the idea. It's a lot easier and makes more economic sense to deliver locally and satisfy your big customers who live nearby because they are--in all the world--the best, safest market to do business with. From this you realize that the U.S. is ultimately the best market for Canadian oil. And it is only through us that Canada can get quick access to other markets, because a Canadian pipeline over the Rockies will be very difficult and Vancouver doesn't have the best harbors for barges. Thus,the U.S. is ultimately in the driver's seat if it can negotiate its position properly.
photo
evershiftingcenter
Never cut what you can untie.
06:42 PM on 03/09/2012
Are you kidding me oil isn't pizza for starters. It may make sense but your talking about a country that does almost nothing because it makes sense. We export everything, we buy drugs cheaper in Canada after we've exported them from the United States. We send apples into Mexico for shining then import them back to the United States for sale. We do almost nothing locally, our manufacturing isn't local. I am baffled why anybody would believe the process would be any different. We'll get the promises from oil and politicians, making the same batch of promises they break every time.

The most telling facts about this deal when it was legislated the products refined be sold locally in the United States it didn't pass. This is about investors who want to make money and about politicians willing to let them make money. While putting at risk drinking water for 2 million people only creating around 5 thousand temporary jobs and 1 hundred permanent jobs. This isn't pizza that logic does not apply.
05:58 AM on 03/10/2012
You're right about the investors and politicians. I've read that John Boehner has investments in 7 companies that would profit by the pipeline, so in that case, the investor IS the politician.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AlonzoQuijana
02:14 PM on 03/09/2012
We're against nuclear, coal, and nat gas (fracking!).... We hate oil and the products it produces... We're OK with wind, but ONLY if it does not make any noise, disrupt birds or in any way ruin the view, and do not want high voltage transmission lines to get the power to the cities... We're tearing down dams (they disrupt fish migration) and we're certainly not building any more.... That leaves solar. Does anyone honestly think we can power an energy intensive economy with close to 100% solar? Especially if we convert to electric cars as Obama wants us to do.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Lee Harrington
I'd Love To Change The World..
02:32 PM on 03/09/2012
Solar and electric work great

Only the Big Oil companies don't own the sun.

"more energy from the sun falls on the earth in one hour than is used by everyone in the world in one year"

"I'd put my money on the sun and solar energy. What a source of power!...
I hope we don't have to wait until oil and coal run out before we tackle that."

~Thomas Edison, 1931
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AlonzoQuijana
02:40 PM on 03/09/2012
Realistically, how is this going to work. I live in a 30-story condo in a congested city. Where am I supposed to put the solar panels? Hang them out the north-facing window? And you want to add 120 million electric cars to the grid?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
oildad
09:20 PM on 03/09/2012
If it was easy and cheap, even you would have solar by now..........
dem4theday
The Dude Abides.
04:33 PM on 03/09/2012
Trascanada should be, through the truth in advertising act, renamed transcanada with spills. These weren't due to employee mistakes or events that couldn't have been foreseen or planned for. These spills were due to making a promise to the Canadian government that pipe meeting these specifications would be used then overridden by investors screaming for "More profit". Oil sands retrieval is dirtier with less actual oil retrieved. Lies aren't a good thing to base an argument upon, but as you were.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pmoschetta
Where are the Jobs, Speaker Boehner?
05:27 AM on 03/10/2012
For every 1000 pounds of tar sands product refined, you get ONE gallon of diesel
01:05 PM on 03/09/2012
Many of you posters here opposing the pipeline cannot be as stupid as you appear in your posts. Therefore, I have to believe that you either live in metropolitan areas where you have access to mass transit and can therefore afford to be against additonal oil supplies or your are part of the evironmental movement that is killing this country.
Speculators make bets on the value of oil based on supply and demand. Oil is a GLOBAL commodity priced on Global Demand. If speculators see that there is a greater likelyhood of higher demand for lesser supply they bet that the price is going to rise.
Regardless of where the additional supply ultimately ends up more supply in the market will lower prices. We should be drilling here, we should be adding refining capacity. Not only would it bring prices down but it would also add much needed jobs.
Maybe some of you don't mind paying more for anything that may need to be shipped around this country, maybe you don't need heating oil or gas or food or furniture. Maybe you don't really want Americans working. Higher oil prices hurt more that just the price at the pump.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Lee Harrington
I'd Love To Change The World..
01:56 PM on 03/09/2012
Completely Untrue

We Are "Drilling Here"....and Big Oil is shipping it (oil refined into diesel fuel) to Europe....

The only way to "bring prices down" is to use less...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AlonzoQuijana
02:19 PM on 03/09/2012
Or use more of our cheaper, North American oil.
04:17 PM on 03/09/2012
We are using less. It's not only the US that is driving up the price. The developing nations are experiencing higher demand. We are not drilling near the amount that we could be .
I just find it amazing that people have no problem with the fact that we are buying oil from other countries and we won't drill it here, when we have more oil than Saudi Arabia right here in the US. We'll use it here but we won't make it here.
What happened to all those people screaming "Bring the Jobs Back Home" and "Buy American"?
Last year we had 2 refineries close on the east coast and 1 more announced it plans closing this year, because they lost over a billion dollars last year. The reason is they are forced to buy higher cost Brent crude on the east coast. They cannot buy the cheaper priced crude from Canada because of the lack of a distribution system.
That will mean still higher prices and more people out of work.
Hey, I'm all for alternative fuels and technologies, who wouldn't be, if they could make them affordable and dependable. That isn't the case, yet. Not many can afford a 40,000. electric car. So right now we should be using what we have and continuing to work on alternatives.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AlonzoQuijana
02:18 PM on 03/09/2012
We definitely should be drilling here. The less dependent we are on Middle East crude the better. This would also help some of the east coast refiners -- if we can build the pipeline infrastructure from the upper midwest -- since they have to use more expensive African and Middle East oil.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Lee Harrington
I'd Love To Change The World..
02:28 PM on 03/09/2012
We are already "drilling here."

It won't help...Big Oil ships it to Europe and Latin America

It's called profit
01:02 PM on 03/09/2012
The people supporting this pipeline are either lying through their teeth, owe their souls to the oil companies, or are too stupid to be in Congress.

The oil is going to be sold on the world market and is NOT intended for domestic use. Instead, the American people are supposed to allow them to endanger our precious and irreplaceable water resources and pollute our land, for NOTHING, just for the sake of oil company profits.

Meanwhile, the US is a net oil EXPORTER. So much for drilling more here to bring down gas prices. Anyone who thinks oil markets work that way doesn't have a clue. However, given the clips out there of GOP spokespersons and Fox news anchors explaining again and again, when Bush was in office, all the factors that mean a president has no control over oil prices, maybe it's time to haul out those old clips during the campaign. Some of the same people now who are blaming oil prices on Obama are the ones saying exactly the opposite when Bush was in power.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AlonzoQuijana
02:20 PM on 03/09/2012
WTI is cheaper than Brent, so let's use our cheap oil and not import expensive, Middle East oil. Canadian Tar Sands are cheaper still, but need special treatment that only the Gylf coast refineries can give it -- hence the need for Keystone.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Lee Harrington
I'd Love To Change The World..
02:37 PM on 03/09/2012
Saudi crude is "light, sweet"...

That means it's easier to refine into gasoline with a lower sulfur content...

That's why it is preferred.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pmoschetta
Where are the Jobs, Speaker Boehner?
05:36 AM on 03/10/2012
Do Independent, Liberatarian skeptics ever post a link to back up their nonsense? No. But I will that proves they are wrong

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2011/08/110819-keystone-xl-canadian-oil-and-chinese-market/

And this is from LAST August!