OP-ED | Keystone Pipeline Is In Our Nation’s Interest
by Linda McMahon | Jan 3, 2012 10:34pm
(10) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Opinion
We’ve all heard the old saying “never look a gift horse in the mouth.” When it comes to the proposed Keystone Pipeline Project, President Obama appears to have looked the horse in the mouth, put it in the barn and locked the door. I strongly urge the President to approve what is clearly a win-win proposition for America. Further delay is not in our national interest.
We all remember the President’s promise in 2009 that his huge $825 billion spending bill would unleash a flood of shovel-ready jobs in the beleaguered U.S. construction industry. Yet the jobs never materialized. Last September, President Obama finally admitted that the “shovel- ready program wasn’t quite as shovel ready as we thought.”
But now the President has an amazing opportunity to approve a real shovel-ready project. The proposed Keystone XL Pipeline will create an estimated 20,000 American jobs, at no expense to taxpayers, and bring over 1 million barrels of oil a day to the U.S. from our Canadian neighbors
His inaction seems inexplicable and, frankly, indefensible, for a number of reasons.
First, the total jobs denied us will probably far exceed the estimated 20,000. Keystone XL stands ready to put some 13,000 Americans to work to construct the actual pipeline. These would be pipefitters, welders, mechanics, electricians, and heavy equipment operators, among others. Another 7,000 manufacturing jobs would be created across the U.S. What’s more, thousands of additional spin-off jobs likely would be created by the increased demand for local goods and services along the pipeline route.
Second, the President’s stated justification for delay, environmental concerns, has been addressed and put to rest. The U.S. State Department conducted a comprehensive review and its findings are conclusive: the pipeline poses minimal environmental risks to soil, wetlands, water resources, vegetation, and fish and wildlife, and it will create few greenhouse-gas emissions. Keystone XL will transport oil that is very similar to oil already being safely transported and processed by other pipelines across the U.S, and its pipeline will be the newest, strongest and most advanced in North America. Over time, pipelines have proven to be the safest way to transport crude oil.
Third, Keystone XL has stated its willingness to work with states and localities to reroute the pipeline, if necessary, and to reach agreements to compensate landowners along the proposed route.
Fourth, the potential harm would be not just economic, but strategic as well. Should we continue to say no, Canadian Prime Minister Harper has made clear his intent to ship the oil overseas, most likely to China. Thus, we would deny ourselves a secure source of energy, even as global tensions are rising, oil prices are rising, and Iran is threatening to close the Straits of Hormuz, the world’s lifeline for energy supplies. The President’s former National Security Advisor, General Jim Jones, has warned against the folly of leaving America more vulnerable in a world filled with bad actors. His advice should be heeded.
Mr. President, our economy is starved for jobs. As parts of the Middle-East remain volatile, we must put our nation one important step closer to energy resources outside regions hostile to the US. This is no time to look a gift horse in the mouth. Please forget the politics and do what is right for America.
Linda McMahon is a Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate
Tags: keystone pipline, Linda McMahon, Obama
(10) Comments
posted by: ... | January 4, 2012 10:00am
Jobs are jobs, which is always good; but you’re totally inflating the number without proper citation. Both TransCanada (in charge of developing the pipeline) and the federal government forecast at best 6,000 to 6,500 jobs for 2 years. This fact is provided by a NYTimes Editorial, which has been confirmed by BBC, NPR, and several other news sources.
But your warping of facts does not stop there. “The U.S. State Department conducted a comprehensive review and its findings are conclusive.” The Hill just reported 2 days ago that the review is not complete and that they would ultimately have to reject the plan. The 60-day rush period put in place for Obama to decide was deemed too fast for the State Department to properly analyze all factors and conclude whether or not the pipeline was in the best interests of the nation (http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/201917-white-house-gop-battle-for-supremacy-on-keystone).
And even Nebraskan’s of both parties have significant opposition to this because of the potential environmental impact. So to change the route (which has been discussed since late 2011) to prevent any potential impact to the environment, there needs to be a new review. So this project is not even close to being ‘put to rest’, and for good reason.
I support independent energy, national security, and U.S. jobs. But this project seems to be a rammed through idea with greater risk to the health and environmental soundness of the nation than the benefits provide at face value.
posted by: Disgruntled | January 4, 2012 10:18am
1-Nonsense.Very much like the pipeline in Alaska you will have a mini-boom and then a bust regarding these temporary jobs.Economic hitmen come up with similar projections around the globe to entice citizens to support projects like this that they generally do not need.
2-Take your studies to any spill area from Alaska to Santa Barbara to New Zealand to back to The Gulf.Tell residents that the studies ensure their well being.
3-The fracking industry “works” with communities the same way. “Take our money or we go someplace else”.
4-Refining Canadian muck so we can continue to be a NET EXPORTER of refined fuels and Americans can continue to pay inflated prices at the pump may make sense for Big Oil but I would rather see us get a little greener and get off the oil dependence.THAT would be true national security.
All this from a person who lives in a community that won’t even let a weigh station be open on the interstate near their town.
If the pipleline was to go through Conyers Farms would YOU be for it,or would you take a cash payment and move to,say,Stamford?
You just lost my potential support with this tripe and believe it or not I come from the land of cotton and oil.I just never really was able to dink the Kool-aid on demand especially when offered up by politicians and industry bagmen/women.
posted by: kenneth_krayeske | January 4, 2012 10:51am
The Keystone XL Pipeline is a fraud, so it no surprise that Mrs. Millionaire-Wants-To-Buy-A-Senate-Seat supports it. Hard work and civil disobedience by activists, led by eco-hero Bill McKibben, forced Obama to punt on this disaster in September. Now, Mrs. McMahon puts it forward as an idea for jobs. The job estimates she uses come from Transcanada.
In 2008, TransCanada’s Presidential Permit application for Keystone XL to the State Department indicated “a peak workforce of approximately 3,500 to 4,200 construction personnel” to build the pipeline. This fact comes from TarSandsaction.org. The 20,000 jobs number McMahon kicks around? Tarsandsaction.org says it is drawn from a 2011 report commissioned by TransCanada that estimates 20,000 “person-years” of employment based on a non-public forecast model using undisclosed inputs provided by TransCanada. In other words, made up from thin air.
More importantly, when McMahon says it will bring gas to US cars, remember that the Keystone XL pipeline is an export pipeline. It is designed to bring fuel from Canada across the US to the Gulf of Mexico so it can be shipped to Europe and Latin America. So Canadian Prime Minister Harper’s threats are actually in line with the proposed uses.
What we need in a senate candidate is someone who is willing to look beyond our dependence on fossil fuels and start coming up with green energy solutions.
McMahon is not providing leadership here, but is selling crude oil to a nation stuck on fossil fuels, like a drug dealer selling heroin to an addict. Hers are tired GOP talking points for the fossil fuel industry.
Solar, low impact hydro, mass transit, and conservation will get us out of the energy conundrum, not fracking or tar sands or pipelines. Mrs. McMahon, please go retire to your Sexy Bitch lifestyle and leave us alone if all you offer are solutions that will destroy the planet.
posted by: shanbaum | January 4, 2012 10:55am
Without passing judgment on the merits of the pipeline itself, I make two observations about McMahon’s claims: one, her assertion that the stimulus bill caused no jobs to “materialize” is risible. I’d like to see some actual supporting evidence of that from an authoritative source (and not some other Republican hack, please). Secondly, the glowing statistics she quotes are lifted directly from the Trans-Canada website (see, http://www.transcanada.com/keystone.html). Trans-Canada is the Canadian company that wants to build the pipeline. One might want to view a more sanguine analysis (e.g., http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/keystone-pipeline-jobs-claims-a-bipartisan-fumble/2011/12/13/gIQAwxFisO_blog.html). By the way, oil is a fungible commodity. Additional oil on the world market will have the same effect on prices whether it’s shipped to China or Port Arthur. The difference, of course, is in which refiner will pocket the profits - not that that is insignificant; but I wonder, are Gulf Coast refineries running short of supply?
posted by: UConnFan1 | January 4, 2012 11:11am
It is refreshing to see a candidate who is outspokenly in favor of common-sense solutions for creating American jobs. I am astounded that President Obama would pass-up such a golden opportunity to put people back to work. Not to mention the energy security gained by receiving oil from Canada rather than the Persian Gulf! This just makes sense! Way to go, Linda!
posted by: Aldon_Hynes | January 4, 2012 11:48am
An article in the Guardian, Koch company declared ‘substantial interest’ in Keystone XL pipeline provides additional insight into whose interest the Keystone Pipeline is, those who spend vast amounts of their own wealth to influence government for their benefit. It isn’t surprising that Linda McMahon supports this.
Beyond that, I must question if Ms. McMahon really believes that the State Department is the organization that should be doing environmental assessments or if she believes it is in America’s best interest to kowtow to threats from leaders of other countries.
posted by: hartfordhuskiesfan | January 4, 2012 2:10pm
Linda is right. We need to become self-sufficient and provide our own energy.
posted by: Martha H | January 4, 2012 9:51pm
Keystone Pipeline Is In Our Nation’s Interest…
...IF our interest is to threaten the lives of millions of people by continuing to produce more greenhouse gases per person than any other country on the planet.
posted by: Aldon_Hynes | January 5, 2012 11:08am
“Jobs are jobs, which is always good…” Actually, even this needs to be challenged. Prostitution and drug dealing are also jobs, although few would suggest that such jobs are good for the economy, unless, maybe you work for a company which relies on steroid users to produce sexually explicit ‘entertainment’.
No, we need to look for jobs that really do make America stronger. Let’s build better schools, railways and highways, instead of creating temporary jobs to help large corporations and not American individuals.
posted by: Cindy Moeckel | January 6, 2012 1:11pm
Ms. McMahon’s stunning amount of misinformation about Keystone, and her failure to grasp the impending calamity of continued dependence on fossil fuels would be laughable were her views not so dangerous. The Cornell University Global Labor Institute study decimates every assertion Ms. McMahon makes concerning jobs and other economic effects of Keystone. http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/news/092811_GLI_study_finds_Keystone_XL_pipeline_will_create_few_jobs.html
An article in Monday’s Hartford Courant covered the costly impact climate change storms are having on insurance companies. This is only the beginning. Once the few Keystone construction jobs disappear - the idea of a pipeline is to do away with labor once construction is finished—the dependence on oil goes on. And the earth cannot bear the impact.