Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
White House says approval of Keystone pipeline is "certainly possible," despite veto
Last edited Tue Feb 24, 2015, 09:53 PM - Edit history (1)
from Financial Post:
Obama has repeatedly said a State Department review of the TransCanada Corp. project — which would carry crude oil produced in Alberta, Canada, south through the U.S. — should proceed before a decision is made on whether to allow construction of the US$8 billion pipeline.
“Through this bill, the United States Congress attempts to circumvent longstanding and proven processes for determining whether or not building and operating a cross-border pipeline serves the national interest,” the veto message said.
White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Obama’s rejection was strictly about the legislation and not the project. It’s “certainly possible” that Obama would eventually approve the pipeline once a State Department review is completed, he said, without giving a timetable.
“The president will keep an open mind,” Earnest said, repeating past administration language.
The State Department has given no firm timeline for its review of the pipeline, which was first proposed six years ago. Earnest said Tuesday he had no update on the process.
“I would anticipate that once the review has been completed, there would not be a significant delay in announcing the results of that review and ultimately making a decision on this project,” he said.
read more: http://business.financialpost.com/2015/02/24/obama-to-veto-keystone-xl-approval-bill-tuesday-in-blow-to-pipelines-prospects/?__lsa=23ad-c1a4
related:
from Jan. 9 - Pres. Obama's veto threat isn't the end of Keystone decision; it's a rejection of Congress deciding
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026062723
So, the veto (was) primarily about the 'processes'...I think that's a good thing, unless the end result is some sort of compromise decision by his State Dept. to allow the pipeline to move forward in some way.
But, remember, Pres. Obama's veto threat isn't the end of Keystone decision; it's a rejection of Congress deciding. We need to keep our eyes on the ball.
In January the Nebraska court cleared an obstacle for the Keystone pipeline:
Rejecting arguments from three anti-Keystone landowners, the Nebraska justices upheld a 2012 state law that allowed Republican Gov. Dave Heineman — rather than an independent commission — to approve Keystone’s route inside the state. Friday’s ruling will let the State Department resume its almost-completed review of the Canada-to-Texas oil pipeline, which the department halted in April amid uncertainty about the Nebraska case.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest said in November that the Obama administration was waiting for the Nebraska Supreme Court ruling about the route of the Keystone X-L oil pipeline, before completing an evaluation of the project.
“The State Department is examining the court’s decision as part of its process to evaluate whether the Keystone XL Pipeline project serves the national interest. As we have made clear, we are going to let that process play out,” White House spokesman Eric Schultz said in a written statement.
Mr. Schultz said the president would still veto Keystone legislation pending in Congress if it is sent to him for consideration. “Regardless of the Nebraska ruling today, the House bill still conflicts with long-standing executive branch procedures regarding the authority of the president and prevents the thorough consideration of complex issues that could bear on U.S. national interests.”
on edit: from PoliticAverse
A Nebraska judge just found their keystone law unconstitutional...
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/02/19/nebraska-judge-law-allowing-keystone-xl-unconstitutional
Also. the State Dept. environmental impact report issued last year actually was seen as an open door (under his own criteria) for Pres. Obama to approve the project.
NYT:
The department’s long-awaited environmental impact statement appears to indicate that the project could pass the criteria Mr. Obama set forth in a speech last summer when he said he would approve the 1,700-mile pipeline if it would not “significantly exacerbate” the problem of greenhouse gas emissions. Although the pipeline would carry 830,000 barrels of oil a day from Canada to the Gulf Coast, the report appears to indicate that if it were not built, carbon-heavy oil would still be extracted at the same rate from pristine Alberta forest and transported to refineries by rail instead.
Another key border-crossing pipeline benefiting tar sands producers was approved in November 2013 by the State Dept.
This veto is certainly welcome, but there's a question, given the narrow definition of the President's opposition to the pipeline which does not equate with most of environmentalists objections to the destructive practice of tar sand extraction of oil, of whether this veto is about his own prerogative in saying yea or nay, or if it represents a definitive opposition to the project in the end. The veto would not end the decision-making process; just prevent Congress from making that decision on its own. The verdict on the pipeline before the end of his term will still loom; not to mention the narrow margin in the Senate which would uphold his veto and the threat of some 'deal' which would move the approval forward.
17 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
...keep the pressure on. If nothing else, there's certainly someone in the WH who respects our position enough to provide these political delays.
(How's that for optimism? 
)
