Senate passes Keystone XL pipeline bill despite Obama promise to veto

[Jaskalas]

This bill isn't far from being veto proof. Congress may keep trying until they can give the middle finger to obama on the matter.

I like the idea of giving him a popular bill that can overcome Veto... if only to prove that they can do it and get him to consider being more... reasonable.

 

[waggy]

That's not really how it works. A private company is using eminent domain to build a private pipeline to ship private crude to a private holding facility in Texas that can sell the crude to whomever pays the most anywhere in the world. It's really not a win for the American people in terms of "cheap crude".

TransCanada is basically saying we can't get western Canadian governments to allow us to eminent domain over their land to ship this crude to the world market so let's go shit all over private American landowners because eminent domain is easy in that country.

This is why i am Against it. They are seizing property for US citizens to give to a Foreign BUSINESS. They even went so far as to give that business the power to use Eminent Domain.

fuck that. that should NEVER happen. the fact that it has is disgusting.

 

[Subyman]

This is why i am Against it. They are seizing property for US citizens to give to a Foreign BUSINESS. They even went so far as to give that business the power to use Eminent Domain.

fuck that. that should NEVER happen. the fact that it has is disgusting.

I'm not so sure about that. If the government couldn't use eminent domain then we'd never get infrastructure in new locations. Stuff like high speed rail, pipe lines, etc have to run over land and must be continuous from start to finish, which means one land owner out of thousands could put a halt to a huge project without eminent domain. Nothing long and continuous would ever be built again in the US because there is always one person that would refuse. As long as the owner is properly reimbursed and the legislator passes the infrastructure, I have no problem with it.

Even widened roads gets people pissed about the 10ft they have to sell to the state.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Subyman, I believe the point is its a pipeline that is crossing landowners property and its not a road or bridge etcetera. The pipeline is not really for the common good. The pipeline is for foreign oil to be shipped for a foreign company so its easier to sell it outside the USA. How about the landowners get a cut of the oil revenue that runs thru their land every month?

 

[Jhhnn]

I'm not so sure about that. If the government couldn't use eminent domain then we'd never get infrastructure in new locations. Stuff like high speed rail, pipe lines, etc have to run over land and must be continuous from start to finish, which means one land owner out of thousands could put a halt to a huge project without eminent domain. Nothing long and continuous would ever be built again in the US because there is always one person that would refuse. As long as the owner is properly reimbursed and the legislator passes the infrastructure, I have no problem with it.

Even widened roads gets people pissed about the 10ft they have to sell to the state.

Remember the hue & cry from the right wing over Kelo v New London? Have they forgotten so quickly?

If it was wrong then in New London, why is it right now in Nebraska?

It's a function of spin from the propaganda organs of faux Libertopia & very, very short memories from their devotees.

 

[waggy]

I'm not so sure about that. If the government couldn't use eminent domain then we'd never get infrastructure in new locations. Stuff like high speed rail, pipe lines, etc have to run over land and must be continuous from start to finish, which means one land owner out of thousands could put a halt to a huge project without eminent domain. Nothing long and continuous would ever be built again in the US because there is always one person that would refuse. As long as the owner is properly reimbursed and the legislator passes the infrastructure, I have no problem with it.

Even widened roads gets people pissed about the 10ft they have to sell to the state.

I didn't think it was that confusing.

This is not using ED to take to build a rail line, a road, lay utilities for a housing suburb, or a park.

This is taking private land to give to a private (foreign business at that!) business.

This is not for the "greater good" this is to enrich a company.

THAT SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN.


IF the business owner can not buy the property TOUGH FUCKING SHIT for them. make a better offer.

 

[Jaskalas]

I didn't think it was that confusing.

This is not using ED to take to build a rail line, a road, lay utilities for a housing suburb, or a park.

This is taking private land to give to a private (foreign business at that!) business.

This is not for the "greater good" this is to enrich a company.

THAT SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN.

Would the greater good be defined as US government ownership of that company, or pipeline? I'm just trying to decide if it'd count as a public works then.

As it stands your argument is quite persuasive.

 

[kage69]

I didn't think it was that confusing.

This is not using ED to take to build a rail line, a road, lay utilities for a housing suburb, or a park.

This is taking private land to give to a private (foreign business at that!) business.

This is not for the "greater good" this is to enrich a company.

THAT SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN.


IF the business owner can not buy the property TOUGH FUCKING SHIT for them. make a better offer.

It's not often I agree with you waggy, but right on. That is a huge point for me as well. It also smacks of bullshit that any American company who wants to build projects like this has to fund an emergency disaster fund for any accidents, but that is being waved for our Canadians neighbors for some reason.

Just another corporate fuckjob where the US tax payer will be stuck with the risks, while the benefits are sent beyond our borders or to a private company and it's shareholders. To the GOP that is some kind of victory.

I think it really speaks to just how desperate they are to claim they got something noteworthy done, it's just a damn shame they can't get behind something we need, like highways and bridge overhauls, or getting our grid up to snuff.

It's funny for me to personally hear people all frothy in their advocacy of this Canadian corporate stimulus act like there is nothing wrong with tar sands oil, somehow forgetting all the reasons they ridiculed the rise of corn ethanol years ago. That's not even touching on the subject of how bad it looks for us and other developed countries to be warning others on chaining themselves to oil, for them to be looking for renewable sources of energy to use to avoid our mistakes. And here were are trying to upgrade our existing infrastructure for prolonged use of the dirtiest most caustic version of the stuff there is, and to allow to be used more everywhere.

The stupidity and shortsightedness of it all is just amazing, even by contemporary republican standards.

 

[kage69]

Remember the hue & cry from the right wing over Kelo v New London? Have they forgotten so quickly?

If it was wrong then in New London, why is it right now in Nebraska?

It's a function of spin from the propaganda organs of faux Libertopia & very, very short memories from their devotees.

This.

Well said Jhhnn.

 

[Subyman]

Subyman, I believe the point is its a pipeline that is crossing landowners property and its not a road or bridge etcetera. The pipeline is not really for the common good. The pipeline is for foreign oil to be shipped for a foreign company so its easier to sell it outside the USA. How about the landowners get a cut of the oil revenue that runs thru their land every month?

I understand, its debatable if the transport of critical natural resources should be just as important as public transportation regardless of public or private interests. My comments were directed at Waggy's assertion that private companies should never be able to seize land (with government approval) to construct large works. There is no way I'd agree with Pizza Hut seizing a house in a prime location for deliveries, but there are some projects I would agree with such as a private high speed rail system or important resource transportation infrastructure.

FWIW, they already have the keystone pipeline, this is just another phase that adds a short cut. So it has been done before.

I didn't think it was that confusing.

This is not using ED to take to build a rail line, a road, lay utilities for a housing suburb, or a park.

This is taking private land to give to a private (foreign business at that!) business.

This is not for the "greater good" this is to enrich a company.

THAT SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN.


IF the business owner can not buy the property TOUGH FUCKING SHIT for them. make a better offer.

The problem is that some people may never accept an offer no matter what it is. I think there should be fair mediation between the company and the people with the government as an impartial party. Large private works are critical to future expansion of our infrastructure and economy. Elon Musk proposes high speed transport that would only be possible with ED in some cases. The government's job is to regulate this process and they are. The company has to go through legal means to perform an ED on property, so it has the government's approval and justified the need. All sides have been heard and its taking an act of US congress to approve the project. That's the most oversight you can possibly have.

Would the greater good be defined as US government ownership of that company, or pipeline? I'm just trying to decide if it'd count as a public works then.

As it stands your argument is quite persuasive.

I think it is very, very important to mention that every state that this pipeline actually goes through voted for the pipeline. I think that should speak volumes.

 

[Jhhnn]

I understand, its debatable if the transport of critical natural resources should be just as important as public transportation regardless of public or private interests.

I don't understand how Canadian petroleum tar piped to Texas to be refined for export is a "critical natural resource" for America.

 

[Fern]

That's not really how it works. A private company is using eminent domain to build a private pipeline to ship private crude to a private holding facility in Texas that can sell the crude to whomever pays the most anywhere in the world. It's really not a win for the American people in terms of "cheap crude".

TransCanada is basically saying we can't get western Canadian governments to allow us to eminent domain over their land to ship this crude to the world market so let's go shit all over private American landowners because eminent domain is easy in that country.

The issue is just the "XL" part of the keystone pipeline. From what I've seen little-to-none of the XL pipeline has used eminent domain.

My understanding is that it's presently illegal to sell crude oil overseas. However, I'm not 100% sure that applies to this oil.

Regardless of the above, since oil is a global commodity it will be additional supply and thus work to suppress price no matter where it is sold.

I'm too lazy to research, but it seems a bit questionable to claim finishing the XL pipeline will do much other than shift the transportation from semi's/highways to pipeline.

Fern

 

[Victorian Gray]

The issue is just the "XL" part of the keystone pipeline. From what I've seen little-to-none of the XL pipeline has used eminent domain.

My understanding is that it's presently illegal to sell crude oil overseas. However, I'm not 100% sure that applies to this oil.

Regardless of the above, since oil is a global commodity it will be additional supply and thus work to suppress price no matter where it is sold.

I'm too lazy to research, but it seems a bit questionable to claim finishing the XL pipeline will do much other than shift the transportation from semi's/highways to pipeline.

Fern

land expropriation, some examples:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/texas-farmer-fights-keystone-xl-route-1.1151782

http://www.macleans.ca/politics/the-untold-story-of-the-keystone-pipeline-war/

 

[Darwin333]

I find the whole idea of how democracy is put into action to be at odds with representation and freedom. That would be the fault of our system, where roughly half of the nation are citizens with representation and the other half are effectively alienated. Democracy is a choice of candidates, not the spoils system. Even the first is a sham if parties control the elections. There are many things I like about our Constitution but I believe the absolute power of the two party system and almost complete unaccountability while in office, combined with loyalty to party interests superseding the interests of all citizens (not just those of their own party) to be a horrid mistake.

At this point the two parties are entrenched and we are fucked and stuck with them. The only way to erode their power is for them to do so willingly and we could probably count the politicians that are willing to give up power on a single hand. Instead they are digging in even further and ensuring that you have only two "real" choices come election time.

Why do you think some of the most contentious and debated topics are almost completely irrelevant, such as abortion which has already been ruled upon by the Supreme Court, it's to keep us looking at one hand while they do the shit that really matters with the other. Unfortunately the majority of us buy it hook, line and sinker.... Smoke and mirrors, just distractions to keep us busy while they have their way with us.

 

[CLite]

The issue is just the "XL" part of the keystone pipeline. From what I've seen little-to-none of the XL pipeline has used eminent domain.

My understanding is that it's presently illegal to sell crude oil overseas. However, I'm not 100% sure that applies to this oil.

Regardless of the above, since oil is a global commodity it will be additional supply and thus work to suppress price no matter where it is sold.

I'm too lazy to research, but it seems a bit questionable to claim finishing the XL pipeline will do much other than shift the transportation from semi's/highways to pipeline.

Fern

This is foreign crude being brought in the country, it will not be restricted from being sold overseas.

The most likely shift will be lower margins for US refiners located close to Canada whom are enjoying steep discounts due to the combination of US crude export ban plus Canada having a hard/expensive time getting oil to anyone else. The keystone line will drop the price in getting Canadian oil to the world market and thus most likely provide a similar drop to any discounts those refiners have been enjoying due to the shipping limitations.

The effect on the world market in terms of stabilizing crude prices will microscopic to the point of irrelevancy.

 

[Subyman]

I don't understand how Canadian petroleum tar piped to Texas to be refined for export is a "critical natural resource" for America.

It already happens. The XL is only an extension, which the states it runs through voted for. It isn't only for export, it provides resources which the US refines into a finished product, and it helps our nearest ally facilitate the movement of a resource to the open market. I'm happy to have more Canadian oil on the market.

Oil in north america has always been a critical natural resource. It is not easily attrited during war time.

 

[Bowfinger]

This is foreign crude being brought in the country, it will not be restricted from being sold overseas.

The most likely shift will be lower margins for US refiners located close to Canada whom are enjoying steep discounts due to the combination of US crude export ban plus Canada having a hard/expensive time getting oil to anyone else. The keystone line will drop the price in getting Canadian oil to the world market and thus most likely provide a similar drop to any discounts those refiners have been enjoying due to the shipping limitations. ...

I've suggested this as well, but none of the Keystone proponents here has been up to addressing it. I finally decided to do a little digging, and found that TransCanada, itself, studied this impact. They reported that due to excess regional capacity, they must currently discount oil by about $3.24 per barrel when selling to refineries in the upper Midwest. This costs them up to $3.9 billion per year compared to the expected export profit once Keystone XL is built. This will be coming out of consumers' pockets throughout the upper Midwest. That's the modern GOP, bending over working Americans once again.

Here's the report: https://docs.neb-one.gc.ca/ll-eng/l...sons_for_Decision.pdf?nodeid=604637&vernum=-2

This shouldn't really be a surprise to anyone who understands basic economics. The Keystone XL project is expected to cost around $7 billion. (I strongly suspect that does not include the lobbying costs that have lured so many politicians on board.) Companies don't spend that kind of money without expecting a significant return on that investment. Clearly, this is one of the ways they expect to recoup that cost, by increasing energy costs to millions of Americans.


Edit: For those interested in a counterpoint to the deceptive Perryman study, here's the study I was reading that led me to the report linked above: https://www.ilr.cornell.edu/sites/ilr.cornell.edu/files/GLI_keystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf . No doubt it has its own biases, but they document their work in some detail.

 

[werepossum]

I've suggested this as well, but none of the Keystone proponents here has been up to addressing it. I finally decided to do a little digging, and found that Keystone, itself, studied this impact. They reported that due to excess regional capacity, they must currently discount oil by about $3.24 per barrel when selling to refineries in the upper Midwest. This costs them up to $3.9 billion per year compared to the expected export profit once Keystone XL is built. This will be coming out of consumers' pockets throughout the upper Midwest. That's the modern GOP, bending over working Americans once again.

Here's the report: https://docs.neb-one.gc.ca/ll-eng/l...sons_for_Decision.pdf?nodeid=604637&vernum=-2

This shouldn't really be a surprise to anyone who understands basic economics. The Keystone XL project is expected to cost around $7 billion. (I strongly suspect that does not include the lobbying costs that have lured so many politicians on board.) Companies don't spend that kind of money without expecting a significant return on that investment. Clearly, this is one of the ways they expect to recoup that cost, by increasing energy costs to millions of Americans.


Edit: For those interested in a counterpoint to the deceptive Perryman study, here's the study I was reading that led me to the report linked above: https://www.ilr.cornell.edu/sites/ilr.cornell.edu/files/GLI_keystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf . No doubt it has its own biases, but they document their work in some detail.

Consumers don't buy barrels of oil, consumers buy gallons of gasoline or diesel. Gallons of gasoline or diesel are market priced, not based solely on production costs and certainly not based on production costs of a single supplier. For instance, Saudi oil is remarkably cheap to produce, yet gasoline from Saudi oil costs the same as gasoline from Canadian tar sands oil or from fracked North Dakota oil.

 

[Bowfinger]

Consumers don't buy barrels of oil, consumers buy gallons of gasoline or diesel. Gallons of gasoline or diesel are market priced, not based solely on production costs and certainly not based on production costs of a single supplier. For instance, Saudi oil is remarkably cheap to produce, yet gasoline from Saudi oil costs the same as gasoline from Canadian tar sands oil or from fracked North Dakota oil.

Are you seriously trying to argue that oil prices don't affect gasoline prices? /facepalm I suppose you think current low gas prices are due to a wave of overwhelming altruism triggered by the November GOP wins, and have nothing to do with Saudis slashing oil prices. Also, gasoline incurs no transportation costs, which is why gas prices are identical from coast to coast. And of course, there's only one refinery in all of the upper Midwest, so there is no competitive pressure between refineries when selling their products.

And DSF wonders why I can be condescending. Go play.

 

[MongGrel]

This is why i am Against it. They are seizing property for US citizens to give to a Foreign BUSINESS. They even went so far as to give that business the power to use Eminent Domain.

fuck that. that should NEVER happen. the fact that it has is disgusting.

Subyman, I believe the point is its a pipeline that is crossing landowners property and its not a road or bridge etcetera. The pipeline is not really for the common good. The pipeline is for foreign oil to be shipped for a foreign company so its easier to sell it outside the USA. How about the landowners get a cut of the oil revenue that runs thru their land every month?

+ a lot of numbers

 

[Vic]

It's the best Congress that money could buy.

 

[senseamp]

What's in it for Obama and Democrats? Obama shouldn't sign bills with just what GOP wants. That takes away his leverage to get the Democratic agenda advanced. If GOP wants to get stuff they like past his veto, they should have to include something the Democrats want in it. If they are passing Keystone XL, they should add alternative energy funding and stuff like that, that will offset the carbon impact in long run.

 

[compuwiz1]

What's in it for Obama and Democrats? Obama shouldn't sign bills with just what GOP wants. That takes away his leverage to get the Democratic agenda advanced. If GOP wants to get stuff they like past his veto, they should have to include something the Democrats want in it. If they are passing Keystone XL, they should add alternative energy funding and stuff like that, that will offset the carbon impact in long run.

Fucking liberal hypocrites......explain how Obamacare passed without a single Republican vote. Maybe it's payback time.

 

[Moonbeam]

The selfishness of spiritually un-regenerated people has brought rot to the nations core. Our time as a great nation is past without the appearance of a black swan spiritual awakening.

 

[Fern]

land expropriation, some examples:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/texas-farmer-fights-keystone-xl-route-1.1151782

http://www.macleans.ca/politics/the-untold-story-of-the-keystone-pipeline-war/

The articles are incorrect.

The first one is absurd. The XL portion doesn't go through Texas.

The XL is phase 4. Phase 1-3a & b already exists.

The XL portion, or phase 4, runs from Canada through Montana, N. Dakota and terminates in Nebraska.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline

Fern