For Obama: Swing State Energy Jobs Good, Red State Energy Jobs Bad | Texas GOP Vote

You are here

For Obama: Swing State Energy Jobs Good, Red State Energy Jobs Bad

The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) is a political committee devoted to maintaining and increasing the 239-member Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.

President Obama has again promised to reject the Keystone XL pipeline and its thousands of shovel-ready jobs, even though a veto-proof majority in the House came together to authorize the pipeline’s construction:

OBAMA MAKES VETO THREAT ON LATEST ATTEMPT TO CREATE KEYSTONE JOBS: “Legislation that would allow TransCanada's controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline to proceed has been passed by the U.S. House of Representatives — a move the White House has vowed to shoot down.” (“Keystone XL Pipeline: White House Veto Promised After Keystone Gets Approval from House of Representatives,” The Canadian Press, 4/20/2012)

HOUSE PASSES KEYSTONE APPROVAL BY VETO-PROOF MAJORITY: “Wednesday’s 293-127 vote on the transportation extension was the fifth time the House voted on the proposed oil pipeline project in the last two years. It was the third time House Republicans adopted the language authorizing the FERC to approve the pipeline — and there’s no indication either side will let up.” (Darren Goode, “House passes Keystone XL pipeline – again,” Politico, 4/18/2012)

20,000: THE NUMBER OF SHOVEL-READY JOBS FROM KEYSTONE PIPELINE BLOCKED BY OBAMA: (Editorial, “Keystone Cop-Out,” The Wall Street Journal, 11/11/2011)

130,000 JOBS: THE LONG-TERM JOBS IMPACT OF THE KEYSTONE PIPELINE, ALSO BLOCKED BY OBAMA: (Editorial, “Keystone Pipeline is the Wrong Call,” The Houston Chronicle, 11/11/2011)

President Obama’s rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline, which runs through a number of “red” states, raises questions about the president’s political motives, since the Obama administration actually approved another pipeline to Canada, Enbridge’s Alberta Clipper, which runs through Minnesota and the 2012 swing state of Wisconsin:

FLASHBACK TO 2009: OBAMA’S STATE DEPARTMENT APPROVED CLIPPER PIPELINE TO SEND CANADIAN ENERGY TO WISCONSIN: “More than two years ago, on Aug. 20, 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton approved a 1,000-mile pipeline that has the capacity to send 800,000 barrels of oil a day from Canada's oil sands to Wisconsin. That pipeline is owned by the Canadian company Enbridge and began operating in October 2010.” (Amy Harder, “Pre-Keystone, Obama Backed Sands Pipeline,” National Journal, 2/2/2012)

CLIPPER PIPELINE AND KEYSTONE XL BOTH ORIGINATE IN THE EXACT SAME CANADIAN TOWN, HARDISTY, ALBERTA: “Sound familiar? The Keystone XL pipeline, as proposed by another Canadian company, TransCanada, would send up to 700,000 barrels of oil a day 1,700 miles from Hardisty, Alberta the same town where the Enbridge pipeline known as the Alberta Clipper originates to U.S. refineries on the Gulf Coast.” (Amy Harder, “Pre-Keystone, Obama Backed Sands Pipeline,” National Journal, 2/2/2012)

BUT ALBERTA CLIPPER RUNS THROUGH MINNESOTA AND ENDS IN THE SWING STATE OF WISCONSIN: (“Alberta Clipper Pipeline Ready to Move Oil,” Associated Press, 3/20/2010)

WHEREAS KEYSTONE XL RUNS THROUGH “RED” STATES SUCH AS MONTANA, NORTH DAKOTA, SOUTH DAKOTA AND NEBRASKA: (Kim Murphy, “Keystone XL Pipeline: New Route Proposed Through Nebraska,” Los Angeles Times, 4/19/2012)

SAME ARGUMENTS USED FOR CLIPPER APPROVAL

NATIONAL JOURNAL: OBAMA ADMINISTRATION USED “THE SAME ARGUMENTS” FOR ALBERTA CLIPPER APPROVAL THAT KEYSTONE XL SUPPORTERS ARE NOW USING: “These are the same arguments that proponents of the Keystone XL pipeline, led by congressional Republicans, cite as reason to approve that project without delay.” (Amy Harder, “Pre-Keystone, Obama Backed Sands Pipeline,” National Journal, 2/2/2012)

OBAMA’S STATE DEPARTMENT APPROVED CLIPPER PIPELINE, CITING BENEFITS OF ENERGY INDEPENDENCE: “The U.S. State Department said that allowing construction of the 450,000 barrel per day line serves U.S. interests by adding secure oil supplies from outside the OPEC nations at a time when political tensions in some producing regions threaten to interfere with oil shipments. ‘The department found that the addition of crude oil pipeline capacity between Canada and the United States will advance a number of strategic interests of the United States,’ it said in a statement.” (“U.S. Approves Alberta Clipper Pipeline Project,” Reuters Canada, 8/20/2009)

OBAMA’S STATE DEPT. ALSO SAID PIPELINE APPROVAL “SENDS A POSIIVE ECONOMIC SIGNAL” AND “THIS SHOVEL-READY PROJECT WILL PROVIDE CONSTRUCTION JOBS FOR WORKERS”: “Approval of the permit sends a positive economic signal, in a difficult economic period, about the future reliability and availability of a portion of United States’ energy imports, and in the immediate term, this shovel-ready project will provide construction jobs for workers in the United States.” (“Media Note: Permit for Alberta Clipper Pipeline Issued,” U.S. Department of State, Office of the Spokesman, 8/20/2009)

ALBERTA CLIPPER PIPELINE WAS PROJECTED TO CREATE 3,000 JOBS: (“U.S. Approves Alberta Clipper Pipeline Project,” Reuters Canada, 8/20/2009)

Another big difference between Keystone XL and the Alberta Clipper is that the Democrats’ left-wing donors weren’t engaged in protesting the Clipper pipeline, but on Keystone, those donors threatened to withhold campaign cash unless Obama killed the pipeline. Apparently President Obama chose political payback for left-wing special interests over creating shovel-ready jobs:

“NO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTESTS” SURROUNDING ENBRIDGE’S ALBERTA CLIPPER: “GOP lawmakers have long accused the Obama administration of playing politics with the pipeline, considering that the State Department approved an oil sands pipeline three years ago, Enbridge's Alberta Clipper, when there were no environmental protests.” (Christa Marshall, “LOBBYING: A Week of Skirmishing Over Keystone XL Decisions Opens Up With a Green Barrage,” Climate Wire, 2/14/2012)

UNLIKE THE ALBERTA CLIPPER PIPELINE, LEFT-WING “CRITICISM OF KEYSTONE XL IS PITCHED”: “President Barack Obama overrode similar concerns last year when he granted Enbridge a permit for Alberta Clipper, but criticism of Keystone XL is pitched. At hearings this week, Sierra Club executive director Michael Brune told U.S. legislators Keystone XL will damage the global climate and ‘drive expansion of the environmental Armageddon occurring in Canada.’ ” (Nathan Vanderklippe, “Transcanda Heralds New Flow of Crude to U.S. as Just a Start,” The Canada Globe and Mail, 7/1/2010)

LEFT-WING SPECIAL INTERESTS DEMANDED POLITICAL PAYBACK, AND OBAMA CAVED

“MAJOR OBAMA DONORS HAVE THREATENED TO WITHHOLD CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS UNLESS THE PRESIDENT KILLS THE PROJECT”: “Some major Obama donors have threatened to withhold campaign contributions unless the president kills the project; both environmental and labor activists have raised the issue with his campaign staff.” (Julie Eilperin and Steven Murfson, “A Pipeline Predicament for Obama,” The Washington Post, 10/17/2011)

GREEN GROUPS THREATENED TO ABANDON OBAMA IF HE APPROVED KEYSTONE: “Environmental groups have been protesting the pipeline that would run from Alberta oil sands to Texas refineries, and there have been rumblings that greens would abandon Obama next fall if he approved it.” (Dan Berman and Darren Goode, “Obama Punts Keystone XL Pipeline,” Politico, 11/10/2011)

OBAMA ACTIVELY “LOBBIED DEMOCRATS” TO BLOCK KEYSTONE APPROVAL, DEFERRING TO RADICAL INTEREST-GROUPS: “Obama lobbied Democrats earlier this month to block a GOP bid to force approval of the Keystone project, which environmentalists have rallied against.” (Dina Cappiello, “Obama to Fast-Track Oil Pipeline, Other Projects,” Associated Press, 3/21/2012)

OBAMA MADE PERSONAL PHONE CALLS TO DEMS TO BLOCK KEYSTONE, NEVER MIND THE JOBS AT STAKE: “The White House lobbying effort, including phone calls from the president to Democrats, signals that the vote could be close when it heads to the floor Thursday. The president is trying to defeat an amendment that would give election-year fodder to his Republican critics who have accused him of blocking a job-creating energy project at a time of high gas prices.” (Manu Raju, “Obama Lobbying Dems Over Keystone XL Pipeline,” Politico, 3/7/2012)

AS OBAMA REJECTED KEYSTONE HE FLOATED A RECONSIDERATION AFTER THE 2012 ELECTIONS, MAKING TOTAL KEYSTONE DELAY MORE THAN FOUR YEARS: (Aamer Madhani and Susan Davis, “Obama Rejects Keystone Pipeline from Canada to Texas,” USA Today, 1/18/2012)

at Apr 25, 2012 9:40 AM
       

Comments

Make sure to check out the comments on Facebook.

The Keystone pipeline is an opportunity that we have long been shying away from for a number of reasons but, that we need to embrace here and now. This pipeline for all its controversial points actually has the potential to put us back on the track to economic prosperity and stability among the many other projects that have been put forth (http://bit.ly/ytP77z). We need to come to the realization that we still are a long way from where we want to be but embrace the necessary steps that its going to take to get there. Let’s take on this project and put together the missing pieces in the puzzle that is our long term job recovery.