Developing Story: Obama Will Veto Keystone

January 6, 2015

Washington Post:

President Obama would veto a bill that would allow for the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, the White House said Tuesday.

“If this bill passes this Congress, the president wouldn’t sign it,” said White House press secretary Josh Earnest.

The White House’s announcement came as the Republican-controlled Congress was being sworn in. GOP leaders have pledged to pass a bill authorizing the pipeline’s construction. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and John Hoeven (R-N.D.) introduced legislation Tuesday authorizing the pipeline’s construction.

“The president is going to see the Keystone XL pipeline on his desk,” Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) said Sunday on “Meet the Press.”

Senate Democrats narrowly blocked passage of the bill in November. The White House said at the time that the bill was something Obama “doesn’t support.”

“If this bill passes this Congress, the president wouldn’t sign it either,” Earnest said.



6 Responses to “Developing Story: Obama Will Veto Keystone”

  1. redskylite Says:

    It is really a pity to see a great country so split on political divides, and difficult to see the progress that is required to avoid dangerous climate change in the coming few decades. Looking at the monthly atmospheric CO2 figures from NOAA and SCRIPPS and the Monthly JMA/NOAA/NASA temperature data, when will people come to their senses and forget the pipeline (and start fighting for our planet). ? At least the current presidency is on the same page.

    The Guardian dispels some of the myths on the pipeline:

    • Hi Redskylite.

      While I’m not a fan of the Keystone XL pipeline, the Guardian article you linked to contains a few myths of its own. The biggest one is that the oil from the pipeline will be exported. While it’s not impossible, it seems extremely unlikely, seeing how the USA is a net importer of oil and can consume every barrel of petroleum that Canada produces.

      What WILL be exported (from the Gulf Coast) are refined petroleum products. That of course happens now. The Gulf Coast refineries currently import petroleium from places like Mexico, Venezuela, Brazil and the Middle East and exports refined products back to Latin America and (sometimes) Europe. So Keystone XL would mean using tar sands oil from Canada instead of imported oil from elsewhere. In the scheme of things it makes little difference where the petroleum comes from, though admittedly the tar sands oil has a poorer EROEI than conventional oil from Venezuela.

      It should be noted that Canadian tar sands oil reaches the USA’s refineries anyway, usually by rail, which is even less efficient (and energy wasting) than a pipeline.


      • pendantry Says:

        All of which simply underscores the reality that Keystone XL is a distraction from the main event. In a sane world we wouldn’t even be discussing whether it should be built, because it would be a given that it would not be.

        • Agreed. The “main event” should be reducing oil, coal and natural gas consumption. To build or not to build this-or-that pipeline is just a side show.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            Pendantry is correct that KXL is a distraction, but Cy goes too far in calling it a “side show”. It is the opening act in the Repugnant’s mission to gut the EPA and environmental regulation of greenhouse gas emissions, INCREASE the use of fossil fuels, and reward the fossil fuel interests for the $721 million dollars they invested in the 2014 elections. And although that’s perhaps what interests Crockers most, the Repugs also want to take the country back to the 19th. century in many other ways. Make barrels of popcorn, because it’s going to be a long movie.

            That toad McConnell has been running his mouth for months about how the first thing the Repugs would do when they seized “power” was get the KXL approved. Obama in the past has waffled with “wait for the court case to be settled in ND and the State Department to finish its work” etc.

            This veto promise is what he needed to say long ago, and I hope he trashes whatever the Repugs send up instantly rather than do a pocket veto. The message needs to be put out to the country that the Repugs are nothing but the running dogs of the fossil fuel interests.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        I hate to say it, because Politifact is usually pretty much right on the money, but much of this reference makes my crap detectors wiggle. A lot of suspect sources in there, and a lot of smoke and mirrors. Many parts of the article wave small red flags when read, the statement at the end among them.

        “Some Keystone XL critics have a point that American refineries would likely export some of the products that they make with crude oil transported by the pipeline. The State Department says, however, that product exports are already increasing, and that trend would likely continue independent of a new pipeline”. Yep, there is plenty of new U.S oil coming into the gulf, and there is no need to bring tar sands “oil” all the way from Alberta to add to the glut of cheaper and easier to refine “local” oil (except to increase the profits of TransCanada and the Kocks, of course).

        “We rate Obama’s claim Mostly False”. I rate Politifact’s analysis as muddled, full of misinformation, and too much BS. Here’s a better one:

Leave a Reply to Cy Halothrin (@cyhalothrin) Cancel reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: