Political Hotsheet
By

Brian Montopoli /

CBS News/ March 8, 2012, 2:01 PM

White House, GOP spar over Keystone amendment

This Sept. 19, 2011 aerial photo shows a tar sands mine facility near Fort McMurray, in Alberta, Canada.

/ Jeff McIntosh

UPDATED 2:57 p.m. ET

President Obama is personally calling senators to urge them to vote against an amendment to the transportation bill now being debated in Congress that would authorize construction of the Keystone Pipeline from Alberta to the Midwest and Gulf Coast, a White House official confirmed to CBS News.

The amendment, from North Dakota Republican Senator John Hoeven, would authorize construction of the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline to transport crude from the oil sands of Alberta, Canada to the Gulf Coast. Mr. Obama denied TransCanada's application to build the $7 billion, 1,700 mile pipeline in January amid concerns about the environmental impact in the sensitive Sand Hills area of Nebraska. He said he was willing to revisit the decision but that a Republican-mandated timeline did not allow enough time for an environmental impact assessment.

The U.S. State Department has jurisdiction over the project because the pipeline would cross an international border. Hoeven says that Congress can circumvent Mr. Obama under the authority provided by the commerce clause to the Constitution.

Clark Stevens, a White House spokesman, said the amendment reflects the fact that "Republicans are trying to play politics with a pipeline project whose route has yet to be proposed, and despite the claims that this would somehow solve the pain families are feeling at the pump today, according to the company it would take years before it transported a drop of oil."

"The fact is that earlier this week, TransCanada acknowledged they still have not identified an alternate route that addresses the legitimate concerns raised by the Republican Governor of Nebraska, as well as local communities, and right now there is no application to assess," he continued.

Added Stevens: "As the president has made clear, we will ensure any project receives the important assessment it deserves, and the Administration will base a decision to provide a permit on the completion of that review, a process that was unfortunately blocked by Republicans in December. Meanwhile we continue to take steps to support American made energy, including doing all we can to expedite construction of a pipeline from Cushing, OK, to refineries along the Gulf Coast."

Republican presidential candidates and lawmakers have hammered Mr. Obama for his decision to oppose the pipeline, which they suggest could ease rising gas prices and would create jobs. Following Politico's initial report that the president was contacting senators to urge them to oppose the Hoeven amendment, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said "it's hard to even comprehend how out of touch he is on this issue."

"I mean, think about it: at a moment when millions are out of work, gas prices are skyrocketing and the Middle East is in turmoil, we've got a president who's up making phone calls trying to block a pipeline here at home," he said in a statement. "It's unbelievable."

House Speaker John Boehner told reporters that "by personally lobbying against the Keystone pipeline, it means the president of the United States is lobbying for sending North American energy to China and lobbying against American jobs."

The Senate is set to vote on the Keystone amendment - one of 30 amendments to the transportation bill, which has attracted a number of unrelated measures, including the controversial Blunt Amendment - later today, or possibly on Tuesday. A separate amendment, from Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, would mandate that oil brought into the country via the Keystone pipeline could not be exported. The amendments need 60 votes for passage.

Hoeven released a statement Thursday saying the Democratic amendment "will force refiners to sell gas at a higher price" because "some refined products can't be used in our country."

"Congress should pass the straightforward Keystone XL pipeline amendment that I proposed with Sens. Lugar and Vitter," he said. "Our amendment provides all necessary safeguards, including whatever time is necessary to address the Nebraska route. It allows construction to go forward on the Keystone XL pipeline to help lower rising gas prices, which are hurting American consumers and our economy, and to reduce our nation's dependence on oil from the Middle East."

With reporting by CBS News White House Correspondent Mark Knoller.

© 2012 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
28 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
RobAla says:
"President Obama is personally calling senators to urge them to vote against an amendment to the transportation bill now being debated in Congress that would authorize construction of the Keystone Pipeline from Alberta to the Midwest and Gulf Coast, a White House official confirmed to CBS News."

That is all we need to know, but I will elaborate on the horrible energy policies of President Obama.

Gas is projected to hit record highs this summer, but his administration does not seem to care.

"Politico: By ALEX GUILLEN | 2/28/12 6:37 PM EST
The Energy Department isn't working to lower gasoline prices directly, Secretary Steven Chu said Tuesday after a Republican lawmaker scolded him for his now-infamous 2008 comment that gas prices in the U.S. should be as high as in Europe.
Instead, DOE is working to promote alternatives such as biofuels and electric vehicles, Chu told House appropriators during a hearing on DOE's budget."

If Americans want to know why we are going to be stuck with massive oil price increases this summer, we have to look no farther than President Obama's administration. High gas prices don't just slam people at the pump, every product that is transported by fossil fuel will have to include the increased transportation cost in the prices in the stores. This will hit the poor and middle income Americans very hard, and it will hurt those on fixed incomes (the elderly) the worst. Not only that, vacations will be cut - nailing the crap out of states that depend on tourism. High gas prices will cut the legs out from under the small amount of recovery that we have experienced.

In an interview Barrack Obama did with the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board very early in the presidential campaign, January 2008 - he said the following:

"Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Coal-powered plants, you know, natural gas, you name it, whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers."

Does this sound like someone who is concerned with Americans suffering under the weight of high energy costs? NO. President Obama is a radical extremist with a consuming ideology that outweighs any concern that he has for suffering Americans. He has a dreamed up personal "vision" that he wants for America, and he does not care who gets hurt - as long as he can bring his own personal vision to pass. Does this sound like a President who really cares about the American people? NO.

We need a practical leader, with proven practical solutions, to turn this nation around economically. I am SO ready for a new President - one that cares to help the American people with proven solutions.
reply
retm-w replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
So rob the pipeline is OK'd and in your dreams you think that will lower gas prices immediatly. Gas prices will go higher with or without the pipeline, there is such a thing as world market price, which the Canadians will charge us for that oil.
wildemanne replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
RobAla seems to think it's ok to destroy our American environment,to repiglicans it's ok, down with Yellowstone, down with the Mississippi valley, down with the Midwestern farms, they don't even care that the gulf just finished a horrible blow to the waters and fisheries, they'd rather eat axle grease, oil soaked corn, and drink petroleum by product tea, bathe in Pennzoil, repiglicans are stupid morons, they deserve to have THEIR FAMILIES MOVED into the and next to a local REFINERY IN FULL OPERATION!if they want oil for their constituents they should move next to a refinery so their wives could enjoy it too
linkicon reporticon emailicon
BuckeyeChuck says:
Ask any backer of the pipeline "Why don't we just build a refinery in Canada to refine the oil, and then sell the gas in the US and Canada".

They will either have no answer or they will admit that the pipeline is all about export to China.
reply
retm-w replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Considering there are five refineries in Alberta.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
WHAT-IS-HE-SMOKING says:
OK, pass the bill provided:
The 20,000 jobs will last longer than the 2 years to construct the pipeline.
The steel pipes used will be from the US and not from some other nation.
That the oil will be used in the US and not shipped to other nations.
And the republicans can guarantee that the price of gas will be $2.50 per gallon, if not then they must leave the House and Senate.
reply
greenlantern1 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Are you sure that we are talking about the same bill?
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Smokey75 says:
by RIP-GOP March 8, 2012 2:48 PM EST
Yep... republicans will go to any length to hand the country over to big oil and multi-national corporations.

This pipeline deal is nothing more than a scam to use tax dollars to further enrich the American aristocracy.
====================================================================================================================================

Not to smart are you? This is a private funded pipe line! No tax money will be used to build it. The reason Hussein got involved is because it crosses international boarders aside from that the federal government has no say.

They could build the pipe line from the gulf coast all the way up to the Canadian border and there would be nothing Obama could do to stop it. All they need at that point is state approval.

But I am sure this Oil hating president would do everything in his power to try and stop
reply
greenlantern1 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
No public money?
The oil companies don't have their hand out?
retm-w replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
No public money?

Who pays for the infastructure needed to build the pipeline, it sure won't be Trans Canada.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
greenlantern1 says:
Was it in the national interest for BIG OIL to drill at the US Naval oil reserve at Teapot Dome?
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
wfw3536 says:
And Obama claims he carse about regular folks paying high gas prices or union folks. By killing the Keystone Pipeline he taking away up to 20,000 direct and indirect jobs. Oh, and lets not forget the state of Nebraska has hundreds of pipelines already crossing the state. This administration is only concerned about his big supporters in the environmental group. Winning his second term is more important than regular folks and union folks.
reply
greenlantern1 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
At one time, Cheney's HALLIBURTON had contracts with SHELL.
Now, Russia does.
Follow THAT money trail?
dj_chi replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
The governor of Nebraska was NOT if favor of the route suggested. A republican governor. When the oil company offers up a decent route, then we can talk about the merits of the whole thing.

But don't pin job creation targets on it - there are claims by the industry of hundreds of thousands of jobs. And some say it will largely be a few thousand temp construction jobs. And the industry is still talking about reducing our energy independence with this - when most of the oil will go overseas to markets that pay more than we do. Big oil is going where the money is, not working to build up our energy independence. That's just sales hype.
See all 5 Replies
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Turbidite says:
President Obama made one of the most courageous decisions of his administration. The pipeline from Alberta to refineries in Texas is a formula for environmental disaster from beginning to end. I have been in the oil business for over fifty years and I have dealt with the Canadian Oil Sands bitumen. It is the nastiest crude in the world saturated with toxic heavy metals and poisonous, corrosive organic compounds that are presently degrading the flora, fauna and surface water of central to northern Alberta and the indigenous First Nations population. The Canadian Government itself is under severe public pressure to discontinue oil sands mining thereby threatening future deliveries of crude to any customer. Why do you think the Canadians won't refine the product on their own territory? Because their public won't allow it! The existing oil sand operations are destroying large parts of the Albertan eco-system and have displaced many indigenous people from their homes, depleted wildlife and ruined timber properties. Alternatively, transmitting the crude by pipeline, such as the proposed Keystone XL pipeline would corrode and penetrate the internal surface of the pipeline and its valve systems within one year. The resulting toxic spills would be so damaging to the environment that it would take decades to clean up. Refining of this bottom-of-the-barrel sludge would create additional deleterious emissions endangering communities within forty to fifty miles downwind of the refineries. The number of people that would temporarily employed could not possible exceed 7,000, and many of those would be Canadian. Trans-Canada Pipeline doesn't trust US pipeline builders....ask them! Once the pipeline is completed the maintenance would be relegated to a few hundred employees and the rest would be let go. Some solution to employment! The Canadian Prime Minister's threat of sending the oil (bitumen) to Asia is absurd. The pipeline would have to cross the Canadian Rockies to a presumed port in British Columbia. BC would never allow this since their major sources of income are from fishing, mining and tourism...not from oil terminals and pipelines that could severely impact most of their economy. If Canada decides to refine their own product then we can assist them in hooking it up to the USA product pipeline distribution system without invoking further eminent domain. And we certainly don't want to be responsible for the refining this crude along the Gulf Coast.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
bstocker1 says:
Here in Montana , our rep Rehberg has been trying to get this pipeline passed by hook or crook. It is a big re-election effort for him that he needs to appease his back pocket kissers - big oil. He states that it will bring millions of jobs , lower oil prices and help the economy. He has co-sponsored this bill to override the presidents power of decision on this and hand it over to the transporation dept. Obama has put this on hold till the final enviro study is complete ; hell the company has not even put together their required emergency response plan yet for when it leaks , and yes it will leak , just like the previous keystone pipeline before it. This is thick tar sands, folks that they have to push thru by utra hi pressure and nasty chemicals to keep it from gelling. More than 2/3 of the pipeline route arent even getting double hull piping to save contructions costs. The ranchers here in Montana . Dakotas and Nebraska are scared this will forever spoil their farms ,livehood and ground water for ever ,all for a few permanent jobs that will actually be created , and those wont even be for the US , rather the Canada office. But then when has the Repug side ever cared about a possible evironment disaster that comes with this bill they are frothing about to get passed.
reply
dj_chi replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Millions of jobs??? Wow - he's really not afraid to pick whatever number's needed to sell it!
linkicon reporticon emailicon
sirmarion-2009 says:
Stop with the bedwetting and tell the truth,Why is Obama calling Democratic Senators to sway their vote for this?Where do the Canadians spend the money they get,Here. Who are our friends Canada. Will this help create jobs,Yes. When you use Henry Waxman and Ruters University as a source you have already lost the argument.SInce 49% of Americans do not pay taxes,and 51% are the ones who work for a living,by working for the 1% who pay most of the taxes. What is your point,no one cares who they work for as long as they can make money by working unless,your on the government handout programs run by Obama,who vote to live.
reply
davidd5063 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
The only people "voting to live" are GOP filth associated with STEALING SS AND MED CONTRIBUTIONS OF EVERYONE UNDER 55 and A MORALLY BANKRUPT GASOLINE REFINING MONOPOLY HERE IN THE US CLAIMING THIS PIPELINE WOULD HELP ONE IOTA!
dj_chi replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
51% are the ones working for a living??? What are you smoking?! And no, there is not just 49% of people paying taxes! You gotta question the info spoon fed to you, and not take it with blind faith.
See all 4 Replies
linkicon reporticon emailicon
sirmarion-2009 says:
So where is the promise to get us off foreign oil? HOW WILL APPROVAL OF THE PIPE LINE HURT ANYTHING? 2 ENVIROMENTAL STUDIES HAVE ALREADY SAID THERE WILL BE NO ILL EFFCTS.Maybe Sandra Fluke will call Obama and tell him she can not afford to finish law school because gas prices are to high?
reply
BlameRepublicanz replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
ohhh yesss NO environmental effects, right? How bout all those tornadoes that ravage that part of the country? That wont affect the pipeline at all? Why do conservatives hate our beautiful landscape?
See all 28 Comments