Senate Republicans push bill expediting Keystone XL Pipeline decision

By: Lucy Madison
Topics: Campaign 2012

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Ky., center, gestures during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Nov. 30, 2011, to discuss the Keystone pipeline.

(Credit: AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

Senate Republicans are pushing for an expedited decision on the Keystone XL Pipeline permit, proposing on Wednesday a bill that would require the secretary of state to grant a permit for the controversial project within 60 days - unless President Obama were to publicly determine that the pipeline is "not in the national interest" before then.

The Obama administration had been widely expected to approve the project by the end of the year, despite strong objections from political allies in the environmental advocacy world. But following widespread opposition from liberal activists, the White House decided earlier this month to postpone action on the matter for another year in order to explore a possible new route for the pipeline.

Some saw that decision as an opportunity for the president to quell concerns of the pipeline's opponents at least through his bid for re-election.

The GOP-sponsored "North American Security Act," however, aims to force the president's hand on the issue.

Sponsors of the bill argue that the TransCanada Corp. project, which would link the tar sands fields of northern Alberta to oil refineries on the Texas Gulf Coast, would create 20,000 jobs "directly," as well as "support hundreds of thousands of jobs in coming years," according to a summary of the legislation provided by Sen. Richard Lugar's office. The Indiana Republican is one of the bill's co-sponsors.

The senators also say the bill would encourage greater oil production in the U.S., and that "trade with Canada complements an 'all of the above' domestic energy strategy: more domestic oil, more alternative fuels, more auto innovation." Mr. Obama, in putting off a decision, is caving to "environmentalist pressure" and putting "electoral politics ahead of the national interest," the bill's GOP sponsors argue.

"With unemployment at 9 percent and millions of Americans looking for work, it's unacceptable that the President would put off a decision on construction of the Keystone XL pipeline until after next year's election. This project will create thousands of direct jobs and generate billions in investments right away, while making our country less dependent on energy from countries often hostile to the United States," said Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell in a written statement.

"There is absolutely no reason to delay a permit decision on the Keystone pipeline--and the jobs that come with it-- for another year in a blatant attempt to appease the President's political base. This is the definition of shovel-ready jobs," McConnell said.

Opponents of the pipeline warn about the hazardous effects on the environment and, potentially, the health and safety of the American people. A number of lawmakers in Nebraska, including the state's Republican governor, Dave Heineman, have particularly objected to the project because the pipeline would pass directly through a critical aquifer that provides a major portion of the state's drinking water.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., blasted Republicans on Wednesday for trying to "legislate a rubber-stamp approval" of the proposed pipeline - particularly in light of criticism that the initial review of the pipeline proposal was mismanaged by the State Department.

"At a time when the State Department Inspector General is conducting a special inquiry into possible conflicts of interest related to the State Department's handling of this project, it is completely inappropriate to try to short-circuit the thorough environmental review process federal law requires," Sanders said in a statement.

Anthony Swift, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, a New York based environmental advocacy organization, called the GOP bill "troubling" and expressed particular disappointment with Lugar, "who in the past has been a champion for farmers and rural communities."

"TransCanada has spent years trying to railroad the American people with a poorly considered route by bullying landowners with eminent domain, threatening States with lawsuits and providing government officials with misleading information about the feasibility of alternatives," Swift writes in a blog post. "President Obama's decision to consider a new route for the pipeline has given farmers and landowners a more level playing field when dealing with TransCanada. Forcing the President to approve a route, sight unseen, would pull the carpet out from under the feet of these landowners and the State of Nebraska."

Lucy Madison
Lucy Madison is a political reporter for CBSNews.com.
Follow on Twitter »

16 Comments +

Add a Comment

See all 16 Comments


by cc1168 December 10, 2011 11:37 PM EST: This is absurd that Mitch McConnell will push for the start of this project when the mountains of Eastern Kentucky are getting destroyed by mountain top removal for the puropose of extracting more coal. Not to mention the harmful effects it is having on the people of Eastern Kentucky. He isn't concerned for the people or the land of Kentucky or anywhere else for that matter.; Reply to this comment


by Circlingheart December 6, 2011 1:16 PM EST: It's an amazing thing, what people will do to feed their addictions. Insanity.; Reply to this comment

by abralkadabra December 1, 2011 1:32 PM EST

The comments appear to reflect strictly an environmental view of this project. How many respondents have worked with pipelines, processing plants and are familiar with the other pipelines along this route. Most of the apprehension seems to be theoretical with the variables at the far end of the spectrum.
Lets get back to work and get energy from our friends an quit funding the countries that use us for their benefit. Remember the SPR program, it was supposed to alleviate our energy dependence. I worked on it and it is just a band aid to a severe wound.

Reply to this comment


by Circlingheart December 6, 2011 1:13 PM EST: Destroying large swaths of boreal forest and replacing it with a big hole in the ground is not a variable. Let's attempt to kick the fossil fuel addiction, and leave our children with a somewhat healthy environment.


by realist51 December 1, 2011 10:21 AM EST: Another stupid remark from Mitch the mouth of the south O'Connell If anyone thinks for one minute that this oil will be staying here in the states is another republican lemming. All oil hits the open market and goes to the highest bidder. if it was for our own energy independence wouldn't it be refined were it is taken from and then sold here in the states? Wouldn't it be cheaper to build a refinery in North Dakota instead of pipe line all the way to Texas?; Reply to this comment


by marychgo November 30, 2011 11:55 PM EST: This is just wrong!

Tar sands oil takes a huge amount of energy and water to get out of the ground, will certainly create spills along the pipeline's route, takes a great deal of energy (and spills massive pollution) at the refinery, produces a very low-grade petroleum product even once it's refined (no, Virginia, it won't power your SUV), and will certainly be shipped to other countries rather than reducing the cost of gasoline at home.

To take on all of these costs in return for a few thousand temporary construction jobs is insane! But then, what IS the GOP these days?; Reply to this comment


by PeterCalgary November 30, 2011 11:27 PM EST: Lucy Madison needs to do her homework! TransCanada has agreed to re-route around the aquifer and Nebraska's governor Dave Heineman now supports building this pipeline. In fact he wants it to start soon!

Shame of CBS for such sloppy journalism.; Reply to this comment


by hazeylee November 30, 2011 7:30 PM EST: Look at the plans for the pipeline. Do u know how many supply lines already exist?
Ever hear of Cushing Oklahome.; Reply to this comment


by liberalmike November 30, 2011 7:02 PM EST: Just say NO to this environmental disaster waiting to happen.

Is it no surprise that the repubs are all for this mess because they have been bought and paid for already.; Reply to this comment


by SciverBryan November 30, 2011 5:06 PM EST: Big Oil again is looking at profits before caring about the environment. What a pitiful lot!

Once a safe path is found for the pipeline our country will get it. Stupid Big Oil mentality will cost us billions of dollars in clean up and ruin our water supply, major rivers and oceans if they do not let engineers work out the details first. Otherwise disaster, chaos and no money for fixing the mess and relocation of people and cities would hurt our economy. Big Oil just wants the Koch Brothers to be happy. That is not right. Demand better.; Reply to this comment


by wfw3536 November 30, 2011 4:47 PM EST: It is clear Obama is delaying this for stickly political reasons so he doesn't have to make a decision until after the election next year. He says he wants to create jobs, but is more concerned about getting re-elected. Where is the leadership we were promised?; Reply to this comment