Home | Virginia
Politics
| National
Politics
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Poll
How Enthused Are You About Tim Kaine for Senate?
Wildly Enthused, I LOVE Tim Kaine!
Strongly Enthused, I like Kaine a lot, Allen sux
Moderately enthused: Kaine's fine, Allen sux
Not enthused about Kaine, but Allen sux
Not at all enthused about this race
I'm voting for George Allen

Results

Weather

Search




Advanced Search


Blog Roll
Virginia Blogs
All Politics is Local
Augusta Free Press
Bacon's Rebellion
Coarse Cracked Corn
Crew of 42
DemRulz
Dixie Pig
Equality Loudoun
The Fix (WaPo)
Greater Greater Washington
The Green Miles
Leaving My Marc
Leesburg Tomorrow
Loudoun Progress
Moonhowlings
New Dominion Project
Not Larry Sabato
Off K Street
Old Dominion Blogs
Ox Road South Blog
Renaissance Ruminations
Richmonder
Richmond Sunlight
RTD VA Politics blog
Roanoke Times blog
Shad Plank
SlantBlog
Too Conservative
True Adventures of the Doorbell Queen
VB Dems
Virginia Education Report
WaPo - Virginia Politics Blog
Waldo Jaquith
Waldo's VA Political Blogroll

Progressive Legal Directory www.criminallawyervirginia.net
www.virginia-duilawyers.com
www.virginia-personalinjurylawyer.com
www.recklessdrivinglawyer.net
www.helpdisabilitylawyer.com
www.criminallawdc.com
www.duilawsdc.com

ADT Home Security in Virginia

Virginians React to Keystone XL Decision

by: lowkell

Wed Jan 18, 2012 at 16:55:07 PM EST


There's a ton of reaction this afternoon pouring in regarding President Obama's decision on the proposed Keystone XL Canadian tar sands project. The statement from the White House is available here (basically, it blames "the arbitrary nature of a deadline that prevented the State Department from gathering the information necessary to approve the project and protect the American people"). Also, keep in mind that this project would have created no jobs, and in fact might have caused a net loss in jobs, according to an independent study by Cornell University researchers. Basically, this thing is a boondoggle for Big Oil, combined with really bad news for the environment, for absolutely no good reason. Other than that, it's freakin' brilliant! LOL

Anyway, here are reactions by Virginian politicians and environmental groups, starting with Rep. Jim Moran, with whom I agree 100% on this. I'll add more as I see them, or as you let me know about them in the comments section. Thanks.

Moran Statement on Denial of the Keystone XL Pipeline Application

Washington, DC - Congressman Jim Moran, Ranking Member on the Interior and Environment Appropriations Subcommittee, released the following statement on the Obama Administration's decision on the Keystone XL Pipeline:

"I applaud President Obama's decision to deny the application for the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline. Our collective national interests, whether economic, environmental, or national security, would be better served by reducing our addiction to fossil fuels. Instead, we should be investing in safer, cleaner energy sources of the future like wind and solar power. A robust investment in clean energy promotes thousands of higher-tech, higher paying jobs. Building a pipeline to tap one of the dirtiest sources of fuel and the few temporary jobs it might create are not in our nation's best long term interests."

lowkell :: Virginians React to Keystone XL Decision
Now, Environment Virginia:
President Obama Expected to Stand Up to Big Oil on Keystone XL Pipeline

Richmond, VA - According to media reports, President Obama and the State Department today will reject an effort to force administration approval of the Keystone XL pipeline. Environment Virginia issued this statement in response:

"Today, President Obama will stand up to Big Oil's latest attack on our health and environment by rejecting the Keystone XL pipeline. While Congressional Republicans work tirelessly for Big Oil, President Obama is taking concrete steps to reduce our dependence on oil and to build a cleaner, healthier future for American families.

"The pipeline would have been a disaster for our climate, the quality of the air we breathe, and critical water resources across our country. It would have deepened our dependence on dirty oil from Canada's tar sands, producing catastrophic levels of global warming pollution.

"Over the past year, hundreds of thousands of Americans have organized and demonstrated in opposition to Big Oil and their destructive environmental practices. Today's decision shows that President Obama on the side of Americans concerned about protecting our health and environment from oil companies. This administration has helped stop the rush for dirty fuels, and it has enacted clean cars standards that will get us off oil, reduce air pollution and create hundreds of thousands of jobs.

"Environment Virginia thanks President Obama for protecting our environment and our health."


Next, Tim Kaine:
Tim Kaine Statement on Keystone Pipeline Decision

Richmond, VA- Governor Tim Kaine today released the following statement regarding President Obama's decision to accept a State Department recommendation to reject a permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline. The State Department recommended denying the permit because there was not sufficient time to thoroughly review the project during the abbreviated window mandated by Congress.

"Today's decision is yet another example of Washington's dysfunction. Instead of a thorough review of the Keystone Pipeline project, Congressional Republicans pushed for a hasty decision and even went so far as to hold a middle class tax cut hostage until they got their way. The American people expect their leaders to make informed, rational decisions, not rush to judgment on important projects because of an artificial, politically-motivated deadline. It's telling that the groups pushing for a decision before the review is complete are the oil companies and their allies like George Allen. In fact, Allen's calls for approval of the Keystone Pipeline began even before the states actually impacted by this project had a chance to complete their reviews. As a former Governor, I would never support overriding the concerns of the affected states in order to rush a project of this magnitude. Just because Congress forced a rushed decision, however, does not mean the review of this project needs to stop. I hope that the administration will continue to examine this project and offer its thoughts on how it can be safely accomplished.

"We need every single job our businesses can create and the Keystone Pipeline may help increase energy supplies, but by itself, it is not a solution to either our economic crisis or our energy crisis. We shouldn't let the Washington hype over this project allow us to lose sight of our larger economic and energy challenges. We must do much more at the state and federal level to help make the right investments in our infrastructure and our workforce to bolster long-term economic growth, and we need an actual 'all of the above' energy strategy. Oil production is now higher than it was under the previous administration. That is progress we need to maintain while also developing a clean energy economy. Our global competitors are winning that race right now, and we cannot afford to fall farther behind."


And our old pal George Allen says (predictably):
This negative, political decision is a disappointing continuation of the counterproductive energy policies that are punishing working families and small business owners with unnecessarily high fuel and energy costs. These harmful approaches, which Tim Kaine supports, are causing higher costs for farmers, high food and gasoline costs for struggling families and fewer job opportunities for Americans. Virginians deserve a U.S. Senator who will put jobs and lower energy costs over partisan politics.  It's time for America to take control of our own destiny by unleashing our plentiful energy resources to help create millions of jobs, increase our supply of affordable energy, allow Americans to access secure sources of energy, and keep our money here in the U.S.A. while generating trillions in revenues to the government - without raising taxes.

Eric Can'tor says (among other idiotic things): "Clearly the President has decided he is not serious if this is the decision he's going to make on this particular project."
Tags: , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Will Radle, Democrat for VA8 (0.00 / 0)
President Obama made the right decision. Whereas Mr. Moran calls it controversial, I do not see the controversy.

We cannot risk polluting our nation's largest aquifer. Period. To do so would be wrong and very dangerous. Building the pipeline so foreign companies can sell fuels in the Gulf of Mexico would leave us with the pollution and the risk. And little else.

We thank President Obama for ultimately taking the correct, responsible action. We only ask why did it take so long?



He didn't. (4.00 / 1)
Call the decision controversial, he called the pipeline controversial...which it has been and will continue to be even though the application has now been denied.

[ Parent ]
Not Controversial (0.00 / 0)
Sounds like we agree. The President made the right decision and it was not controversial.

It would be controversial only if there was a sound reason to appove the application. Otherwise, it's just an application warranting rejection.

Dominic, do you want to identify why the application should have been approved? If not, where's the controversy?

Oil lobbyists threatening the President was highly inappropriate and obviously not convincing.


[ Parent ]
Ugh.. (4.00 / 1)
Will,

I think at the bottom of this issue we both agree - I don't think the application should have been approved. However your wrong in saying it is not controversial - by definition the Keystone XL pipeline discussion has been.

The word 'controversial' is derived from the word controversy, which is defined (by dictionary.com) as "a prolonged public dispute, debate, or contention; disputation concerning a matter of opinion."

Based off of that definition, the Keystone XL Pipeline has been controversial. It's been an ongoing debate for months, and the opponents who were trying to stop it had only really organized in the last year against it - groups like Bold Nebraska, Sierra Club, et al.

The proponents of this pipeline would disagree with you that there isn't sound reason to approve this project, they falsely call it a job creator (20,000 jobs vs. 6500 max in an independent analysis) amongst other reasons.

And I guarantee you that the President's decision to deny the application will be controversial (just listen to the news today with nuts like Eric Cantor and John Boehner attacking the President over it) throughout the election this fall.


[ Parent ]
Together . . . (0.00 / 0)
we will quicken economic growth, create more real jobs, expand opportunity, increase houehold incomes, keep our promises, and instill confidence in our nation's future.

Protecting our environment and keeping our fresh water supply safe is not negotiable. It does not match the legacy we are creating.

Boehner and Cantor are not my models of rationale thought. Are they your models, Dominic? They would rather screw our nation and our people than work together toward a better future.

Your need to look up dictionary.com for this casual conversation is peculiar. Are you seeking to disagree or insult people?


[ Parent ]
Ah yes... (4.00 / 1)
Eric Cantor and John Boehner are exactly who I look up to in politics and use as models of rationale thought (insert obscene amounts of sarcasm here.)

Will, I was just baffled by your use of the word, controversial. I can see where you are trying to go with your statement, that the President rejecting this application shouldn't be an issue, its common sense to those of us who can think for ourselves - but you didn't get there.

The Republicans who are in the pocket of Big Oil have made this a controversial issue and someone describing it as such would be correct (which is what Jim Moran did in his statement.) Thousands of people protested against big oil who was lobbying for this absurd pipeline, actually a lot of people were arrested at the White House this fall protesting, further making this a controversial topic.

So before I responded to your statement, I wanted to make sure I knew the correct definition of the word since how you were using it to subtly attack Jim Moran didn't make sense to me. I pointed out the definition to make sure we were both referencing the same word. If I was seeking to insult you, I would have come up with something better than a dictionary.com definition.

If you're going to attack your opponent in the future, please try and do a better job of it because you're insulting the voters intelligence with crap like that.


[ Parent ]
Compliments to the President (0.00 / 0)
are obviously taken by you as an insult to my representative. Mr. Moran is not my focus. It seems he is, however, your focus.

My focus remains creating effective, susatainable solutions to the challenges confronting our community and our nation.

Virginia's Eighth Congressional District deserves a representative who does not parse words in giving the President recognition in taking the proper course of action.

Why would you need to reference Boehner or Cantor's position on this important decision?  


[ Parent ]
Gerry Connolly statement (0.00 / 0)
"President Barack Obama's rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline project stops Big Oil's effort to export oil and raise gas prices for Americans. That definitely would not have been in the national interest."

Follow me on Twitter.

Disappointment for Americas Energy Future (0.00 / 0)
The decision today from the Obama Administration is regrettable.  Approving the pipeline is the sound decision given our current economic and political climate.  Although we would like to believe that this helps to end our dependence on big oil and stick it to the Canadians for helping along global warming (who by the way are well on their way to retiring their entire coal fleet) it won't.  The oil from the tar sands in Canada will find a way to market guaranteed.  All we have done is removed ourselves from the potential revenue and jobs created from this reality.

I agree that our national interests are better served by a reduction to fossil fuels.  Unfortunately, Americas consumption of oil will not change tomorrow because of this decision.  As a consequence, we will continue to send money overseas to the middle east and south america.  Is that truly in the best interest of our national security?

We are no further along the road to energy independence today then we were yesterday, and I would argue we've actually taken steps backwards.  It is time that we have a serious informed conversation about America's energy future instead of what makes fragmented sound bites that talk about world that doesn't exist.


Here's video of what you're advocating. (0.00 / 0)

All that, for what? According to an independent study of the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline by Cornell University researchers, this project would have created no jobs, and in fact might have caused a net loss in jobs. In addition, "By helping to lock in US dependence on fossil fuels, Keystone XL will impede progress toward green and sustainable economic renewal and will have a chilling effect on green investments and green jobs creation. The green economy has already generated 2.7 million jobs in the US and could generate many more." There's also this:

...Tar Sands development has attracted investment capital from oil multinationals-with Chinese corporations' stake getting bigger all the time.1 If approved, KXL will be almost certainly be constructed by temporary labor working with steel made in Canada and India. Much of the Tar Sands oil will be refined in Port Arthur, Texas, where the refinery is half-owned by Saudi Aramco, the state-owned oil company of Saudi Arabia.2 And a good portion of the oil that will gush down the KXL will, according to some studies, probably end up being finally consumed beyond the territorial United States.3 Indeed, the oil industry is also trying to build another pipeline, Enbridge's proposed Northern Gateway, to carry Tar Sands oil across British Columbia for export to Asian markets, although this pipeline also faces serious public opposition. Clearly, Tar Sands oil and energy independence really do not belong in the same sentence. 1 Dlouhy, Jennifer. "China Invests Billions in Canada Oil Sands,"Houston

Plus, as an added bonus, tar sands development spews out massive amounts of CO2 which helps to toast the planet. Other than that, this is a brilliant idea! LOL

Follow me on Twitter.

[ Parent ]
Wow (0.00 / 0)
And some people in Virginia scream about wind turbines as destroying their "view shed"! The view shed around those tar sands mines make mountaintop mining for coal look less destructive.

Of course, Alberta has always been the most conservative province in Canada, with fairly right-wing politicians. It's not surprising that little attention is paid there to the environmental cost of oil production from tar sands.

For the life of me, I can't figure out how people automatically think that the oil derived from tar sands will end up as part of the U.S. supply. After refining at Port Arthur, that oil can be shipped anywhere in the world...and will be.


[ Parent ]
It's ignorance, fueled by massive oil industry propaganda (0.00 / 0)
and a 24/7 disinformation campaign by those guys. End of story.

Follow me on Twitter.

[ Parent ]
Gasoline Exports (0.00 / 0)
Recent news stories have pointed out that refiners are exporting gasoline rather than selling it domestically since they can get higher prices on the world market. This of course causes a rise in domestic gasoline prices which are subject to the market forces of supply and demand. The pipeline would only serve as a conduit from Canada to our Gulf coast refineries so that it could be processed for export. All the blather about increasing domestic supply is a load of hooey.  

[ Parent ]
Online chat (0.00 / 0)
The above video references the toll on wildlife from mining operations. I chat online regularly with an Alberta resident and I have cut and pasted a portion of our chat from last night when we discussed the XL pipeline decision. Apparently no actions were taken to protect wildlife until there was a flurry of bad media attention:

the tailings ponds were causing a lot of attention due to inattention and neglect
k: not good
logicalgal: when all those ducks were trapped in the oily goop
k: sad
logicalgal: a lot of bad press....and good thing too


[ Parent ]
Advertising

Donate to Blue Virginia

About
The purpose of Blue Virginia is to cover Virginia politics from a progressive and Democratic perspective. This is a group blog and a community blog. We invite everyone to comment here, but please be aware that profanity, personal attacks, bigotry, insults, rudeness, frequent unsupported or off-point statements, and "trolling" (NOTE: that includes outright lies, whether about climate science, or what other people said, or whatever) are not permitted and, if continued, will lead to banning. For more on trolling, see the Daily Kos FAQs. Also note that diaries may be deleted if they do not contain at least 2 solid paragraphs of original text; if not, please use the comments section of a relevant diary. For more on writing diaries, click here. Thanks, and enjoy!

P.S. You can contact us at lowell@raisingkaine.com and you can subscribe to Lowell's Twitter feed here. If you'd like to subscribe to Miles Grant's Twitter feed, click here. For Teacherken, click here. For Kindler, click here.

P.P.S. To see the Blue Virginia archive, please click here. To see the Raising Kaine archive, please click here. To see the Blue Commonwealth archive, please click here.



RSS Feed

Subscribe to Blue Virginia - Front Page


Powered by: SoapBlox