Written by: Matt Bunk
North Dakota political leaders – both Republicans and Democrats – blasted President Obama Wednesday for rejecting a proposal to build a pipeline that would have carried as many as 100,000 barrels of Bakken crude to refineries in Southern states.
The Keystone XL pipeline was to carry carbon-heavy crude from the tar sands of Alberta across to refineries on the Texas coast. It would have picked up oil produced in western North Dakota via a smaller pipeline called the Bakken Link, which would have connected to the Keystone XL in Baker, Mont.
Supporters of the pipeline proposal said the Obama administration chose ideology over practicality and missed an opportunity to create thousands of new jobs and reduce the nation’s dependence on foreign oil.
“At a time when our nation needs jobs, when our economy is stagnant, and conflict with Iran in the Middle East is threatening our national security and may drive the price of gasoline at the pump to $5 a gallon by summer, the president has decided to say no to the Keystone XL pipeline,” Sen. John Hoeven, a Republican from North Dakota, said in a statement. “This is a shovel-ready project that will create thousands of American jobs and help our nation achieve greater energy independence. The president’s denial, it makes no sense.”
Hoeven’s concerns were echoed by leaders of both major political parties in North Dakota.
Heidi Heitkamp, a Democrat who is running for the state’s other seat in the U.S. Senate, said the Obama administration made the wrong decision, “plain and simple.”
“I will fight alongside Senator Hoeven to reverse this wrong-headed decision and put building the Keystone pipeline on the fast track – even if it means upsetting members of my own party,” Heitkamp said in a statement. “It’s time to put aside political games and partisan squabbles in Washington and do what’s right by North Dakotans.”
The State Department’s rejection of the Keystone XL came after three years of federal reviews and staunch opposition from environmentalist groups. National activists had joined forces with a group of Nebraska landowners who were concerned about the pipeline’s proposed route through an ecologically sensitive area known as the Sand Hills.
In December, Congress voted to give the State Department a 60-day deadline to approve or deny the project, despite warnings that imposing such a deadline would cut short the review process and force the administration to reject the proposal.
In a statement Wednesday, Obama blamed Congress for trying to push the administration into making a rushed decision.
“The rushed and arbitrary deadline insisted on by congressional Republicans prevented a full assessment of the pipeline’s impact,” he said. “This announcement is not a judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but 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.”
Earlier this year, the State Department delayed a final decision on the pipeline until 2013, saying it needed more time to review additional routes through Nebraska. That announcement appeared to save Obama from an election-year battle over a project that had been cast as a choice between jobs or the environment.
TransCanada, the Canadian company that was seeking to build the pipeline, was working with officials in Nebraska to find a new path around the Sand Hills. Officials had indicated that they were close to an agreement on a new route – one that would add about 100 miles to the pipeline – when Congress voted to impose a deadline on the Obama administration.
TransCanada will be allowed to re-apply for permission to move forward with the project.
“The Department’s denial of the permit application does not preclude any subsequent permit application or applications for similar projects,” the State Department said in a statement.
Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer, in an interview with Fox News, said the State Department was forced to deny the Keystone XL permit because Nebraska had yet to approve a route through the state. Schweitzer, a Democrat who supports the pipeline, said the rejection was based on an incomplete permit application that will take at least six more months to finalize.
“The State Department has been asked to approve a pipeline to nowhere,” Schweitzer said. “The State Department cannot sign off on a permit until there is a route in the permit application. There isn’t one.”
Still, Republican leaders from across the U.S. said delaying the project will come with a high price. They said the project would have created much-needed jobs for out-of-work Americans and helped the country avoid higher gas prices that may result from conflicts in the Middle East.
But in North Dakota, where the pipeline had overwhelming public support, political leaders from both parties were unified in their criticism of the Obama administration.
U.S. Rep. Rick Berg, a Republican who is running against Heitkamp for a seat in the U.S. Senate, said he will continue working toward the approval of the Keystone XL and is exploring legislative proposals to remove the president’s permitting approval authority and transfer it to another jurisdiction’s control.
“In North Dakota, we have seen the benefits of a long-term energy plan that encourages investment in our state’s natural resources and energy infrastructure,” Berg said. “Rather than playing into election-year politics, the president should take a page out of North Dakota’s book and work toward common sense policies that would grow our energy sector, help make America energy independent and create good American jobs.”
Pam Gulleson, a Democrat who is running for North Dakota’s seat in the U.S. House, said the pipeline would have provided a “shot in the arm” to the U.S. economy.
“I hope the Administration is open to reviewing the proposal again,” Gulleson said in a statement. “Washington should be focusing on how we can create jobs and strengthen our economy, and the Keystone pipeline could create new opportunity in North Dakota. We need to find a way to protect our natural resources and build the Keystone XL oil pipeline in a timely fashion.”
Brian Kalk, a Republican who also is running for North Dakota’s seat in the U.S. House, said the Obama administration jeopardized an opportunity to bolster domestic oil production because China has indicated it would buy the oil produced in Canada’s tar sands.
“The Keystone rejection is one more example of this administration’s unwavering war on fossil fuels,” Kalk said in a statement. “This project would bring tens of thousands of high paying private sector jobs to American workers. The president chose to side with the radicals who want to destroy the fossil fuel industry, rather than with the hard working men and women who need the jobs.”
State Senate Minority Leader Ryan Taylor, who is running for governor, said the pipeline would have helped alleviate the pressure on western North Dakota’s infrastructure caused by the oil boom. Truck traffic, in particular, would be reduced by additional pipeline capacity, he said in a statement.
“We lumbered into this oil boom without proper state planning,” Taylor said in a statement. “In ND, we should be innovating ways we can do better for ourselves rather than waiting on the federal government. We should be incentivizing and building additional refinery capacity in North Dakota to add value to our Bakken crude right here at home.”
-Matt Bunk is publisher of the Great Plains Examiner.
This entry was posted in ND in DC, NEWS CATEGORIES, Slideshow and tagged Bakken, Berg, Congress, Heitkamp, Hoeven, Kalk, Keystone XL, North Dakota, obama, Taylor. Bookmark the permalink.Nebraska is the hold out on this project. Trying to rush approval for the project by imposing deadlines and attaching it to other legislation is typical DC politics.
The pipeline will happen eventually. It is easy to say we need the pipeline, but how may of us would want this in their backyard if there was a chance that if it leaked our water that we used for drinking, watering our livestock, or irrigating our crops would be ruined for years. Nobody likes to have things forced on them and the people of Nebraska are no different.
To sign off on a contract without all the details in place (like a route thru Nebraska) would be irresponsible and would also turn into a political football. Being responsible is not about pleasing everybody all the time, but being able to stand up to the pressures and make the right decisions.
The Keystone XL has been greatly oversold. The 13,000 “shovel-ready” jobs are no more than 4600, and possibly as low as 2500. And those are temporary, two year jobs. Check out Cornell University’s independent study into TransCanda’s figures:
http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf