President Obama’s press spokesman said today the president is set to veto a bill authorizing the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline from Alberta to the Texas Gulf Coast.
I’ve waffled and wavered a bit on this, but I remain (more or less) convinced that the pipeline is a positive thing to do.
Thus, the president’s veto pen should go back into the drawer. But it won’t.
It’s going to mark the first big confrontation between the Democratic president and the Republican-led Congress that just took its seat on Capitol Hill. Republicans control both legislative houses, but they don’t have enough votes to override and Obama veto.
So, what’s the problem with the pipeline?
Foes say it’s environmentally hazardous; they say the oil won’t benefit North American consumers; they’re dubious about the number of jobs it will produce.
White House press secretary Josh Earnest said the president doesn’t want Congress to “circumvent” the studies that’s ongoing regarding the pipeline. That’s one reason for the veto.
I recall hearing from the State Department that the environmental impact of the pipeline would be minimal. Is that an invalid assessment?
As for the impact of the oil on prices that are still in free fall, I happen to believe that any production of oil that continues to flood the market and enables worldwide supply to outpace demand is ultimately good for consumers — such as me and you.
So what if it won’t end up in North American gasoline tanks? It’s going to add billions of gallons of fuel to the world market. Is that not a net plus for consumers?
Let’s watch this confrontation unfold. It’s going to be the first of many nasty fights set to ensue between the White House and the 114th Congress.
I have to say that I am not a fan of the Keystone pipeline. There are several reasons but I will try to focus on one.
The real benefits of the construction of this pipeline are the temporary jobs created during its construction. We’re talking about welders, pipefitters, truck drivers etc. who participate in the actual construction. Then there are the restaurants, motels, landlords etc. who will benefit from the demand for services. All good?
Maybe not.
In the communities receiving the boost, the only people who will benefit are the ones in the position to take advantage. I have seen instances where the natives have been at a disadvantage. Retirees with fixed incomes have to pay the inflated prices at the grocery store. The grocer will charge it because he knows that the pipeliners can pay it. It will not matter that his lifelong neighbors can’t afford it. Strike while the iron is hot.
My wife hails from eastern Montana, about 75 miles from Williston ND. That is close enough to experience the effects of the oil boom firsthand. There is no place to live in her hometown. There are people paying $2000 a month for a house that used to rent for $500. The population has more than tripled.
Let’s look ahead.
With the price of crude oil being manipulated by the Saudis, the oil boom in Williston may not be sustainable. When it is no longer profitable to drill, they will stop. All that money in the economy will dry up down to the last waitress. The assets that were accumulated will be protected, if possible, and placed in reserve for the next boom.
You see where I’m going?
Boom and bust economics are not a good model upon which to build a stable society.The Keystone pipeline will employ, if one can believe the Keystone website, about 9000 workers. They will be supported by about 35000 others. When completed, the pipeline will require less than 100 permanent jobs.
Boom and bust.
I am no expert, but I have been in a few boom towns in my life. Scary places.
I have other reasons to oppose the pipeline, but I have probably ranted long enough.
I still have mixed feelings about it. I don’t see the Keystone as the environmental danger others do. I’m still weighing it all. Thanks as always for your comments.