November 14, 2014 4:16 pm -

[su_right_ad]Whether it passes the Senate or not is irrelevant since it’s sure to get a White House veto. Republicans rushed to do this as soon as possible after the election to show how smart they are.

Friday’s House vote was 252-161. Supporters included 31 House Democrats — but not Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), who publicly backs the pipeline. Michigan Republican Rep. Justin Amash voted “present.”

The Senate on Tuesday will take up identical Keystone legislation, which is being promoted heavily by Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) in advance of her Dec. 6 runoff election. But under a deal with Republicans, the bill that clears the Senate would be the House version sponsored by her runoff opponent, Rep. Bill Cassidy (R-La.).

As of Friday morning, Keystone supporters could count on backing from 59 senators, including every Republican senator and 14 Democrats. The latest was Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), whom Landrieu listed as a supporter during a conference call with reporters Friday afternoon.

The pro-Keystone side is still waiting for word on whether Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) or Angus King (I-Maine) will come down on their side. Sen. Tim Johnson (D-S.D.), an avowed “no” on the bill as recently as Thursday, is also facing pressure to switch sides.

Being ignored is that the Keystone Pipeline would produce oil that is not sold domestically.

The president also seemed to endorse the argument — pushed by Keystone opponents like billionaire Tom Steyer — that the oil moving through the pipeline would end up being exported abroad. “Understand what the project is, it will provide the ability for Canada to pump their oil and send it through their land down to the Gulf where it will be sold everywhere else,” he said.[su_csky_ad]

D.B. Hirsch
D.B. Hirsch is a political activist, news junkie, and retired ad copy writer and spin doctor. He lives in Brooklyn, New York.

34 responses to House Showboats By Passing Keystone Pipeline Bill For 9th Time

  1. R.J. Carter November 14th, 2014 at 4:29 pm

    aka Mary Landrieu’s last-ditch effort to win re-election.

    The pipeline will come… in 2016.

    • KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker November 14th, 2014 at 4:37 pm

      Several Dems ran shitty campaigns expecting to capture the republican troglodytes. They lost and probably she will too.
      Progressives, aka thinkers, tend to stay home when their choice is republican dogma v/s republican lite.

    • BillTheCat45 November 14th, 2014 at 5:27 pm

      Bet it won’t. Trans Canada ain’t going to wait forever.

      • R.J. Carter November 14th, 2014 at 5:32 pm

        True. But they’ve waited 7 years. They might wait 1 more if they had an indication of a shift in the political winds.

        • mea_mark November 14th, 2014 at 5:36 pm

          Nope they already have plans. Besides oil prices plummeting isn’t helping either and solar along with other renewable energies keep getting cheaper.

          • R.J. Carter November 14th, 2014 at 5:46 pm

            Still working on that solar-sail car, though.

          • Carla Akins November 14th, 2014 at 6:56 pm

            Then step it up, we’re waiting dammit.

          • R.J. Carter November 16th, 2014 at 12:46 pm

            It won’t fold up into my briefcase yet, but I’m trying.

          • Carla Akins November 16th, 2014 at 1:24 pm

            Try harder!

    • Anomaly 100 November 14th, 2014 at 5:36 pm

      She’s trying for that Southern vote. I really detest that about politicians. I admit it. That’s why I love Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. They don’t stoop to that level.

  2. tiredoftea November 14th, 2014 at 5:02 pm

    Let’s not also mention that it will not produce near the number of jobs that have been hyped. All told, it will leak more than the total number of jobs it will offer.

    • KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker November 14th, 2014 at 5:12 pm

      And…. it’s boondoggle for those that think the tar sands oil will benefit Americans and lower domestic oil prices. The entire purpose is to export to China!
      Canada (rather Alberta) has been trying pipe this crap to the west coast and the province of British Columbia doesn’t want anything to do with this toxic crap either.

      • Jaz November 14th, 2014 at 5:56 pm

        You got that right, about BC. The entire region is a mountain range and they would be traversing over thousands of rivers, and streams, most of which are food fish breeding grounds. Harpers plan now is to scrap the Keystone and pipe it to the Atlantic(halifax) to ship overseas. This was before the mid-terms. We have a Federal election next years, so we shall see what happens after that.

        Alberta oil crude will never benefit US consumers, it is all meant for overseas transport. I truly wish these people for the pipeline would understand that.

      • Spirit of America November 14th, 2014 at 6:22 pm

        “and lower domestic oil prices”…
        It will. Oil is a world commodity, the more barrel per day on the market, regardless of source, the lower per barrel. Is it worth it is the issue.

        • KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker November 14th, 2014 at 6:36 pm


        • Jaz November 14th, 2014 at 6:36 pm

          That may be true to some extent, but the US pays a much lower price than most other countries, per gallon. Add to that the added $$$ processing of this crude, unlike it’s much cleaner counterpart and US distibutors will be trying to sell to the highest bidder. It’s been well recorded that Corporate oils bottom line is the almighty dollar.

          • Spirit of America November 14th, 2014 at 6:50 pm

            We pay lower because, for the most part, of other countries taxing it, then importation/transportation costs. Per barrel cost is same for each buyer and the more on the market, lower per barrel.

          • mea_mark November 14th, 2014 at 8:07 pm

            Don’t forget those subsidies.

          • Spirit of America November 14th, 2014 at 11:02 pm

            First, and nothing against you, but noticing the organization, I would need to find collaborating numbers on those topics… I prefer non-aligned study figures.
            But, w/that being said, those numbers relate to per barrel pricing still, which affects world cost while I was stating our gas price to others. Example, in 2007 the brits cost per liter composed of 81.5% in taxes.

        • Kick Frenzy November 14th, 2014 at 7:09 pm

          Nope, not worth it.

          Not even because of the environment or temporary jobs or whatever.
          Just the cost to build/operate compared to the cost of production and profit doesn’t wash out anymore.
          When gas at the pump was selling for ~$4/gal, it was possibly profitable… now that gas is under ~$3/gal, it’s no longer feasible.

          So even if it does get approved through Congress AND the President, the companies themselves may very well decide not to pursue a project that will end up costing more than it’s worth.

          • Spirit of America November 14th, 2014 at 7:16 pm

            I’ve never seen the internal numbers as to the zero mark, but you may well be right.

          • mea_mark November 14th, 2014 at 8:16 pm

            It has been in the news here and there recently, without subsidies from the US and lowering prices it is dead. Best chance to get that tar sands oil to market is through Canada, east or west, depending on the local opposition. Going east, more expensive to do but can sell for more to Europe when Russia is unreliable. Going west, cheaper to build and bigger market with China and Japan but sells for less. This should be a Canadian problem, not a US problem, and the US should not subsidize it at all, period.

          • Spirit of America November 14th, 2014 at 9:33 pm

            I agree w/no subsidies by us gov(I’m not for them for any business).

          • Jaz November 15th, 2014 at 2:59 am

            Somewhat a stupid statement and not well researched. Want to try again Mea underscore

    • Jaz November 14th, 2014 at 5:58 pm

      The only mass foreseeable jobs will be the clean-up crews, after their spills.

      • tiredoftea November 14th, 2014 at 6:02 pm

        Good point, I hadn’t considered that!

      • burqa November 14th, 2014 at 8:47 pm

        One way to stop it would be if a labor union was able to organize all the pipeline builders…..

        • Spirit of America November 14th, 2014 at 10:53 pm

          Most unions have publicly expressed favoring it.

        • Jaz November 15th, 2014 at 2:47 am

          The job for pipe-liners in oil isn’t long enough to warrant a union, unless you can find another union to cover it? Do you have an answer to this? Maybe Craig does?

  3. mea_mark November 14th, 2014 at 5:28 pm

    Obama vetos bill and Canadians build one across their land taking the risk. This is nothing but showboating for the ignorant.

  4. burqa November 14th, 2014 at 8:43 pm

    It shouldn’t be long before they reopen the investigation into the death of Vince Foster…

  5. Wayout November 14th, 2014 at 9:52 pm

    And lo and behold, Harry Reid will finally allow the Senate to vote on their own version, just to help embattled Mary Landrieu in her runoff. What a coincidence!