House Republicans are setting the stage for a showdown with President Obama over the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline, which the administration has conveniently delayed a final decision on until after the 2012 election.
In an effort to draft legislation to extend the payroll tax cut passed late last year, House GOP leading are reportedly planning to attach language that would allow construction on the pipeline to move proceed. Most analysts estimate that the pipeline could immediately create about 20,000 jobs directly, and hundreds of thousands more indirectly. Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper has said approving the construction of the pipeline, which will originate in Canada, is a “complete no-brainer.”
President Obama, however, has threatened to “reject” any payroll tax legislation that included “extraneous” provisions such as the Keystone pipeline. “I don’t expect to have to veto it because I expect they’re going to have enough sense over on Capitol Hill to do the people’s business, and not try to load it up with a bunch of politics,” he said on Wednesday.
One could argue that creating jobs for Americans in a struggling economy is quintessentially “the people’s business.” Many suspect that the president’s decision was designed purely to appease a prominent constituency — environmental groups — as his reelection campaign swings into full gear.
To get a sense of how stunningly out of touch the president is when it comes to the Keystone pipeline, consider that he finds himself on the wrong side of an issue on which the AFL-CIO and Republicans both agree. Here’s Mark Ayers, President of the Building and Construction Trades Department at the AFL-CIO, writing in the Huffington Post:
For America’s skilled craft construction professionals, any discussion of the Keystone XL project begins and ends with one word: JOBS. Today, roughly 14% of the American construction workforce is unemployed — which is significantly higher than the overall national unemployment rate of 9%.
Throughout America’s Heartland, the Keystone Pipeline represents the prospect for 20,000 immediate jobs, and as many as 500,000 indirect jobs via a strong economic multiplier effect…
In total, the Keystone XL pipeline project has been subjected to tremendous amounts of scrutiny through the National Environmental Policy Act, which includes review by ten federal agencies, as well as numerous state and local agency reviews. The State Department SDEIS has concluded that the proposed Keystone XL pipeline would have “limited adverse environmental impact during construction and operation” and that it would significantly strengthen U.S. economic security.
But most importantly, it is America’s workers who are clamoring for the expedited approval of this important project.
As President Obama has rightfully declared when it comes to the creation of jobs, “WE CAN’T WAIT.”
And as House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R., Va.) said Thursday: “If the President is serious about his commitment to economic growth and jobs in this country, he’ll sign this bill.”
“I don’t expect to have to veto it because I expect they’re going to have enough sense over on Capitol Hill to do the people’s business, and not try to load it up with a bunch of politics".
So, putting the kabbash on domestic energy production is the "people's business"?
And attempting to develop our domestic energy resources is "politics"?
As usual, let us merely reverse the great orator's statement:
"I'm politically protecting a pet constituency instead of doing the people's business."
At this point, I don't think the American people are under any delusions that this man cares one wit about improving the economy. He cares to further shrink it, and demagogue the reasons for the continued contraction.
It's called being "progressive". What is actually progressing, and not regressing, is anyone's guess.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusejust a small nit to pick, this isnt domestic oil/energy development. its canadian oil.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThere are a lot of US companies headquartered in Alberta [Calgary] involved in the tar sands.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf they are headquartered in Alberta, doesn't that mean that they AREN'T US companies? How do you define a 'US' company, if not by where the headquarters is?
By this same logic, Nissan and Hyundai are American car manufacturers...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFish/Chas-- sorry to be impolite, but you are both 'effin ignorant. Keystone XL delivers tar sands crude to US refineries in Lousiana and Texas, and possible new refineries in Mississippi.The US refineries will process the crude into gasoline, diesel, JP7 and other distilates for US use and export. An enormous number of permanent US jobs will result, this supply of Ethical Crude will ease prices on US consumers, and exports will help balance US trade -- oh and the suppy pressure will help stop enrich our enemies in the ME and Venezuela. All of these important American interests of everyday Americans are being jeopardized because of this punk Obama's personal political calculations.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI don't disagree with what you wrote here, but surely you realize that it doesn't have anything to do with the objections raised - that companies headquartered in another country are not American companies. Surely you can see the difference between that statement and the argument you made?
Regarding the 'political calculations,' I don't have the same opinion on this matter as the Environmentalists do, but I can at least see that their objections are principled ones. It doesn't do anyone any good to belittle principled opposition.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"It doesn't do anyone any good to belittle principled opposition."
That's a rich line, coming from you. I laughed when I read it, and I'm sure others did, too.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFish,
There are dozens of companies from around the world with ventures/investments in the Alberta Tar Sands. These include many U.S. companies, Chevron, Conoco, Marathon and Devon, among others.
It doesn't much matter where their regional offices are.
At the end of the day, they have purchaed drilling/mineral rights and get the benefit of their production. So, yes, in their case, potential income benefits U.S. companies.
If the U.S. government doesn't want the benefits of jobs and investment that comes with construction of a pipeline across U.S. lands and increased activity at U.S. refineries in the gulf, these U.S. oil companies will find another plan. Pipelines already exist to the coast in B.C. where raw materials can be shipped offshore.
Seems like such a no-brained to me that I'm truly befuddled that Obama doesn't want to benefit from, what is, an inevitable oil production mammoth.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusewhat Principle are you standing by with Keystone ?
please tell us the Principle ...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePetroleum is a raw material. Refined petroleum is a manufactured product, much of which is exported. U.S. refineries are a major part of overall U.S. manufacturing.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe prez isn't going to have a chance to veto the House bill, because it will never survive the Senate in this form - which I'm sure Cantor knows.
On a separate note, I'd love to see an article here on NRO detailing the background as to why the House GOP killed the proposed 'no insider trading in Congress' bill that Bachus was working on. Going to be hard to explain that one to voters when the Dems make an issue out of it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNot so hard to explain the delay on the STOCK Act when, "A significant number of members of the Committee on both sides of the aisle have indicated a desire for additional time to study this issue before the Committee moves forward with the markup that was announced for December 14."
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLiberal strategy: Nothing to see here.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFollowed by: Change the subject.
I expect that the Senate has enough Democrats who want to see Keystone passed (for instance, Nelsen of Nebraska), that it will get to the President's desk. And I suspect he will sign it, because he needs both the jobs and the support of labor for the campaign. The environmentalists will give him credit for trying, and it's a win-win-win for the president.
The only downside for him is that he loses a battle with Republicans, but that will fade before the election. And since it is, as Harper says, a "no-brainer", it is very likely to happen, and it will be good for us.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAgreed. This sounds like a "please don't throw me into the briar patch" moment for Obama. He's in a bind on the pipeline and he's counting on the Republicans to get him out of it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI do not agree. Obama cannot allow the Republicans to "win" on any issue, period. This is hard ball politics, and the country be d......
There isn't a hard-core environmentalist (I know them all too well, believe me) out there who will say "Oh well, at least he tried." The environment is their religion, and fossil fuels and the US economy are its top enemies.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI believe I heard today on an ABC News radio update on the half hour that "Republicans were withholding support for the tax cut by attaching provisions that would call for funding of the Keystone pipeline." Paraphrased, but I'm confident the report used the phrases "tax cut" and "funding" as I have.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSo which is it? Is Obama in the pocket of Big Labor or isn't he? You people just can't make up your minds.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseObama is in the pocket of Big Labor. He's also in the pocket of Big Enviro. It's an open question as to which pocket is deeper on any given day.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHow about a really novel idea?
Vote up / down on individual pieces of legislation? Like the way it used to be (hint, hint, 'conservatives').
A good piece of legislation (or nominee) should stand or fall on the merits.
Want a pipeline? Well, make the best dang argument for it and then vote for it!
Want to extend the fica-thing? Same idea.
Now, who really wants to explain how payroll deduction and a pipeline REALLY belong in the same piece of legislation? Hmmmmmm.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse