Thursday, November 13, 2014

Democrats Push for Keystone Pipeline?

By Douglas V. Gibbs

On last Saturday's Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs radio program, our guest, Former California Republican Party Chairman Thomas Del Beccaro suggested that the Republicans, rather than enter the year as a majority in both House of Congress with both barrels blazing, should first go after issues that are popular with the American public, like the Keystone Pipeline.

With their backs against the wall, and more specifically, with the Louisiana Senate Seat in jeopardy, Democrats have decided to follow that advice, themselves, and many are now advocating for a vote on the Keystone Pipeline.

In Louisiana, the election is facing a runoff contest between Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) and Rep. Bill Cassidy (R).  Realizing that the Keystone Pipeline is a popular issue with voters, especially in Louisiana, Landrieu has strengthened her opinion.  She has historically been in favor of the pipeline, but her approval of the pipeline has never been so loud, and distinct.

Democrat voters have shown in the polls that they largely support the pipeline, leaving only environmentalists and President Obama, and his closest congressional allies remaining solidly against the project.

For the most part, the pipeline already exists.  The Obama administration has been denying permits for the remainder of the unbuilt sections, as if the federal government has the constitutional authority to intrude upon the project in such a way.  Congressional approval is believed to be a way to make the President change his mind, or at least put enough pressure on him and his regulatory agencies to remove their obstacles to the completion of the project.

It is amazing to me how much the States and Congress allow Obama to run ramshod over them on an issue that should be legislative, and determined by the States - after all, the federal government has no legal constitutional authority to dictate to States what they can and can't do in relation to lands within a State's borders.  Proponents say the federal government has jurisdiction because the pipeline crosses international borders.  From a constitutional point of view, that means the federal government's only say in the matter is at our border with Canada.  As for the Commerce Clause argument, the claim horribly misuses that clause in the Constitution.  The Federal Government has no authority to dictate the terms of commerce between the States.  The interstate portion of the clause was created only for the federal government to act as a mediator when States found themselves in conflict over interstate commerce.  However, that same clause also gives Congress the authority to regulate commerce with foreign nations, taking the issue out of the exclusive hands of the executive branch.

With the environmentalists losing heavily in the mid-term elections, the Republicans feel that their argument that it is a political mistake for the administration to deny permits for the unbuilt sections of the pipeline is more solid than before.

The Keystone Pipeline would transport oil from the tar sands of Canada to the Texas Gulf Coast in a manner safer than other alternatives.  Whether we build the pipeline, or not, Canada is going to find a way to sell and ship their oil.  The Keystone Pipeline is simply America's way of saying, "Yes, we would like to benefit by transporting your oil, and refining it, which would create jobs, and pump the free market into our struggling economy.

The GOP-controlled House has been in support of the pipeline, while the Senate has sided with Obama in opposition to the project.

Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) voiced strong support for the plan, saying that “it would be a tremendous windfall for all of us. It’s something we can count on. And I can’t for the life of me understand why we haven’t to date been able to move this piece of legislation forward.”

A Senate vote next week will allow Landrieu to say that she voted for the project, putting some distance between her and Obama, and in her hopes, help her in the runoff contest that will be decided next month.

How much of a windfall could the Keystone Pipeline be for the United States?

The oil sands deposit in Canada is massive, and the The Keystone XL pipeline will tap into the second largest petroleum reserves on Earth. The $7 billion, 830,000-barrel a day project would go from Canada, through the Great Plains, crossing six states and ending in Texas.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Climate Change Supporters Suffer Losses - The Hill

Myth #6: The Commerce Clause allows the federal government to regulate all commerce between the states however it seems fit - Political Pistachio

Understanding the Commerce Clause - Political Pistachio

Commerce Clause Meant to Open Flow of Commerce, Federal Government Expected to Act As Mediator - Political Pistachio

Commerce Clause: To Put In Good Order - Political Pistachio

A Debate About Federal Authority in Regards To The Commerce Clause - Political Pistachio

Will Keystone XL Save Mary Landrieu's Senate Seat? Probably Not - Outside the Beltway

House, Senate to vote on Keystone XL pipeline - Washington Post

No comments: