Keystone XL Loses Democratic Support

[bigtree]

from WaPo:


____ The most interesting aspect of this week’s House vote in favor of constructing the Keystone XL pipeline was not the fact that it passed—which was widely expected—but the fact that it got 20 fewer votes than a similar proposal received one year ago.

Rep. Lee Terry’s (R-Neb.) bill would grant the remaining permits TransCanada needs to construct the massive project, which aims to ship heavy crude oil from Canada’s oil sands region to Gulf Coast refineries in the United States. The Obama administration has already awarded the needed permits for the project’s southern leg between Steele City, Okla., and Port Arthur, Tex., but the president has yet to decide whether to sign off on the northern leg, which begins in Hardisty, Alberta. Obama has authority to issue the permit, rather than Congress, because it crosses the U.S.-Canada border . . .

On Wednesday night, the House passed Terry’s bill by a vote of 241 to 175, with 19 Democrats voting in favor. But on May 18, 2012 the House voted 261 to 152 in favor of a motion by Rep. John Barrow (D-Ga.), which would have done essentially the same thing: order the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to issue a permit for the pipeline within 30 days of receiving an application from TransCanada.

What explains the loss of 20 yes votes? Eight Democrats switched their votes, and a more liberal freshman class replaced some of the House’s more conservative members. Reps. John D. Dingell (Mich.), Daniel Lipinski (Ill.), David Loebsack (Iowa), Stephen Lynch (Mass.), Ed Perlmutter (Colo.), Dutch Ruppersberger (Md.), Albio Sires (N.J.) and Timothy Walz (Minn.) all voted aye for Barrow’s motion last year, and against Terry’s measure on Wednesday. Meanwhile, 42 of the 47 Democratic members of the freshman class opposed Terry’s bill . . .


read: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/05/24/is-keystone-pipeline-losing-democratic-support/?wprss=rss_the-fix

related:

Department of State ‏@StateDept 28m
1.2 million comments on Keystone XL Draft SEIS received. @StateDept plans to post sets of 100,000 comments weekly. http://go.usa.gov/brKW

[Buzz Clik]

1. The left has turned this into a line-in-the-sand issue.

I find that misguided, but we do it all the time.

ANWR was huge and a battle worth fighting. Keystone XL? The crappy, yucky, filthy "oil" is going to flow. Period. The tar sands will be exploited. Period. Our country is filled with oil pipelines.

This battle is symbolic only. Win or lose, it will not change any part of the global warming equation, and we will have spent tremendous political capital needlessly.