Obama Said No To Keystone, Another Mistake

In what is being called a political campaign move, Obama will be coming out against the Keystone XL pipeline. Needless to say Obama’s decision does not sit well with Republicans, but many fellow Democrats are not pleased either. The move is being seen as a way for Obama to ensure he gets the backing of the green or environmental vote. OF course Obama runs the risk of alienating unions but is not concerned.

Obama is counting on two things as it pertains to the union vote. First there are way many more environmental voters than union voters, Obama will take the volume of numbers that will vote for him every time. Second, he is counting on the fact that no matter what he does to piss off the unions; he believes they will not vote against him or for a Republican. While that may be true, Obama should not underestimate the union or take their votes for granted. Just because the head of the Union says “vote for Obama” does not mean the out of work American union member that could have benefited from the pipeline project will actually do so. You never know what a voter will do when they get in that voter booth.

President claims the pipeline is not in the best interests of the nation. Forget everything else you know about President Obama, this decision alone shows Obama is not qualified to be president. In fact the pipeline in very much in the nation’s best interest as it addresses two issues that are currently vital, jobs and homeland security. When this hit his desk, Obama decided to put it off until 2013, well after the election. However, in doing so he violated Executive Order 13337. In the EO it specifically sys the Secretary of state is the one to review and decide whether or not to give a permit to a pipeline project. The Secretary does have the option of passing the permit onto the President for final approval. The violation is in the timing. It specifically says that all permit decisions must be made within 90 days of application. Upon hearing the news of the rejection, Conoco representatives say they will reapply just one time for a new application and will do so immediately. It should prove interesting if they do to see if it will process in the 90 day time frame.

How many jobs will the pipeline create, well that depends on whose report you want to believe. Estimates show that the project will employ 20,000 to 50,000 people. These are just the number of construction workers that will directly work on the construction of the pipeline and the two new refineries to be built. Not in those numbers are the indirect numbers of jobs created which are estimated to be 100,000 to 500,000. Some of the indirect jobs created but are not limited to people to man the new refineries, more man power at the existing refineries to handle the additional input of crude oil to process, the manufacturers that will be supplying all the materials from the raw materials to the actual products needed, addition truck drivers to haul the competed products to market, and many more. This project would be far reaching into the jobs market.

In addition to jobs, this project contributes to our national security and helps us be a stronger nation. Every nation has a weakness, their kryptonite, ours is oil. Oil and Gasoline are products this nation cannot be without; we are very dependent on these. Everything from a heating source, fuel for our vehicles, our nation’s electrical power, is just to name a few of the areas where we will suffer if we ran out oil. Those who want to see this nation harmed know that. Back in the 1970s, the oil embargoes that OPEC was doing showed how are nation could be brought to its knees. Today, the turmoil In the Middle East is a prime example of how our dependence has us dealing from a weak position. Everything this President encounters, he has the fear of either losing our oil supply or seeing the prices raised whose effects always resonates in a bad way with our economy. Businesses get hit hard then pass that onto consumers who get hit even harder. I a country really wanted to attack us, all they have to do is cut off our oil supply, wait till we use up what we have then attack. We could put up a good fight for a while, but how well could we defend ourselves without fuel for our naval ships, our places, or the vehicles needed to deploy our forces. The correlation of fuel to homeland security should not be taken lightly and needs to be addressed. Our President has not taken any actions to help reduce our foreign dependence in the near future. In the first 30 days after becoming President, Obama overturned the EO from President Bush allowing to additional drilling, Obama said we should not be drilling for additional oil.

Canada has made it real clear that this pipeline will be built, if it does not go south, it will go west. Canada is referencing the fact that China wants this crude oil. The day Obama announced he would not address the Keystone pipeline until 2013, China made it real clear announcing they will negotiate with Canada to purchase that crude oil. China has been on a global buying spree attempting to purchase as much crude as possible. If we lose this to China and China continues to purchase crude from many other nations, we will be knocking on China’s door looking for oil. What do you think will happen to the price of oil and gas then? Now that Obama has come out against the project, Canada's Prime Minister Steve Harper has come out with a statment. Harper “expressed his profound disappointment with the news,” according to the statement, which added that Obama told Harper the rejection was not based on the project’s merit. If Obama did not deny this based on the projects merit, there can only be one other reason, and that is his decision was a POLITICAL one. one he will have to answer to the voters for. The “decision by the Obama administration underlines the importance of diversifying and expanding our markets, including the growing Asian market,” Harper told reporters in Ottawa. To that end Canada this month began hearings on a proposed pipeline by Enbridge Inc. to move crude from Alberta’s oil sands to British Columbia’s coast, where it could be shipped to Asian markets.

The pipeline first began on the drawing board in 2005. The project met with some resistance in Canada at first over jobs. Canadians were not happy that the majority of the jobs were going to be Americans. This pipeline project was to be built in two steps. Canada approved the construction of the first project on the Canadian section of the pipeline, including converting a portion of TransCanada's Canadian Mainline gas pipeline to crude oil pipeline, on September 21, 2007. March 17, 2008, the U.S. Department of State issued a Presidential Permit authorizing the construction, maintenance and operation of facilities at the United States and Canada border. The pipeline was completed and went operational June 2010, sending crude into the United States. The Keystone XL was to be the second part of an already approved project.

The application for Keystone XL was filed in the beginning of 2009 and the National Energy Board of Canada started hearings in September 2009.It was approved by the National Energy Board on March 11, 2010.The South Dakota Public Utilities Commission granted a permit on February 19, 2010. Now in July of 2010,House Energy and Commerce Committee chairmanHenry Waxman (D) urged the State Department to block Keystone XL, saying in a letter to the department that 'this pipeline is a multi-billion dollar investment to expand our reliance on the dirtiest source of transportation fuel currently available”. Now of course Waxman was wrong because there is no investment for America. In fact this project will not cost the taxpayers one dollar.

The proposed route of the pipeline will cross the eastern most part of theNebraska Sandhills; opponents of the project argued that this route posed an unacceptable risk to the Ogallala Aquifer, One of the world's largest aquifers, it covers an area of approximately 174,000 square miles in portions of the eightstates ofSouth Dakota, Nebraska ,Wyoming , Colorado,Kansas ,Oklahoma ,New Mexico , andTexas. Feasibility and Environmental studies all show that not to be the case. In August 2011, an environmental-impact report by theU.S. State Department found the Sandhills route would be the most economically feasible, and would be unlikely to have significant environmental impacts. So what happened between August 2011 and January 2012? The 10,000 page report on the EPA impact approved study did not change or get disapproved. The feasibility studies that were all approved have not changed. The support for the project has not changed except for President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton. See the video below where Clinton was waiting on the release of the State Department report. The report gives a thumbs up but Clinton and Obama gave it a thumbs down.

Keystone would not be the first crude oil pipeline in the region. In fact there are currently 27 crude oil pipelines that pass through the Ogallala Aquifer region. That does not include gas or natural gas pipelines. When those are added there are well over a hundred. TransCanada CEO Russ Girling has described the Keystone Pipeline as "routine," noting that TransCanada has been building similar pipelines in North America for half a century and that there are 200,000 miles of similar oil pipelines in the United States today. He also stated that the Keystone Pipeline will include 57 improvements above standard requirements demanded by U.S. regulators so far, making it "the safest pipeline ever built."

From the beginning, this pipeline has had strong bipartisan support. 47 Senators support the project, voted for the project, 22 have sent letters to Clinton and Obama urging the permits be issued. Despite that, demands were put on the contractor who would be building the project. Even President Obama was for getting crude from Canada. See what some people have said:

The President Said:

PRESIDENT OBAMA: "…we're still going to have to import some oil… And when it comes to the oil we import from other nations, obviously we've got to look at neighbors like Canada and Mexico that are stable and steady and reliable sources."“But our best opportunities to enhance our energy security can be found in our own backyard,” (President Obama, Remarks, 3/30/11)

OBAMA: "For those - just to give background to folks, there are these tar sands in Canada that can produce oil. There is talk about building a pipeline into the United States to import that oil…I will make this general point, which is that, first of all,importing oil from countries that are stable and friendly is a good thing." (President Obama, Town Hall Event, Fairless Hills, PA, 4/6/11)

Congress Says:

SEN. MAX BAUCUS (D-MT): "We need to put Montanans back to work andcannot afford further delays to the Keystone XL pipeline…"("Baucus, Tester Support Keystone XL," KTVQ News, 11/30/11)

SEN. JON TESTER (D-MT): "The Keystone pipeline will create Montana jobs and itshould not have to wait 14 months for an up-or-down decision…"("Baucus, Tester Support Keystone XL," KTVQ News, 11/30/11)

47 House Democrats voted to require the administration to quickly act on the Keystone XL project, helping to pass theNorth American-Made Energy Security Act(H.R. 1938).

“Rep. Gene Green (D-Texas) said he’s not swayed by Obama’s veiled veto pledge The Keystone is awfully important,” he said

"America truly cannot afford to say 'no' to this privately funded, $20 billion, jobs-creating infrastructure project, which would bolster our economic, energy and national security. To that end, we respectfully urge you to ensure that the Presidential Permit is issued for Keystone XL." (22 House Democrats, Letter To President Obama, 10/19/11)

The Unions Say:

AFL-CIO: "For America's skilled craft construction professionals, any discussion ofthe Keystone XL project begins and ends with one word: JOBS…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… without one single dollar of government assistance."(Mark H. Ayers, President, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO, "For The 99% of Americans, Keystone = JOBS,"Huffington Post,11/3/11)

American View Says:

Perhaps if the pipeline was pushing air or a strong light source, Obama would invest billions in taxpayer money in it and we would have another green project that fails. Maybe that is what it takes for Obama to approve a jobs project. When it did fail, we could add it to the growing Solyndra pile. But instead, he votes down a project that strained our budget to the tune of nothing, zip, zero, nada. Not one dam dime of our taxpayer dollars would-be e spent on a project that would employ thousands, be good for our economy, and improve our homeland security by lowering our Middle East dependence on oil. Did I not hear something about shovel ready once before? I have written articles before on how we should become energy independent as a nation. We need to be self sufficient, tap our own resources of oil and natural gas. Based on estimates, we have between 100 and 150 years of reserves in the ground, we just need to get it. Instead we allow other countries to drill just outside our water boundaries; they tap that resource and sell it back to us! That would be like me giving you chocolate for free to make candy bars but have to buy them back in order to eat one. But there also needs to be a second part, and that is research. We already have solar and wind, but the techknoledgy Is not good enough to address the problem. Wind turbines are good when there is a breeze and they can only produce so many KWs per hour. We need to dramatically find ways to increase KW output and have large storage facilities to store excess till needed. The solar industry needs to do the same. They need to find ways to make smaller panels with bigger outputs. Currently one can put panels and cover 100% of their roof, but still need supplement from the electric company. We need these panels to power the entire home without using the electric company as backup. There needs to be a way to incorporate solar panels in all of our future electric needs like cars and trains. Instead of investing hundreds of billions of dollars on failed companies, we need to invest in research to find energy alternatives or make the ones available like nuclear, solar, wind better and more efficient. Without energy independence we will continue to be at the mercy of foreign oil and if we lose the Canada deal because Obama wants to play politics, we can add China to the list we will beg for oil from.

This is my American View, what is yours…

American View© encourages comments. In brief:

1. Keep it civil and stay on topic
2. No vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks.
3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.

The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. This blog and its contents are copyright © protected, all rights reserved