General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLipstick on a Pipeline: No Way 'Oil-Soaked' Congress Can Improve KXL
1/6/14
Posturing of Senate Democrats with clever Keystone XL amendments does nothing to impress pipeline opponents
"No amount of lipstick will make us want to kiss that pig...
Nothing Congress adds to a Keystone bill will make it better." Jane Kleeb, Bold Nebraska
...Expressing their scorn for both the bill itself and the mindset guiding the Republicans, the climate action group 350.org took to Twitter to say:
Congress' top priority is apparently building Keystone XL. Are they really out of ideas on Day 1? Going to be a long 2 years. #noKXL
350 dot org (@350) January 5, 2015
Though Obama is sure to veto the bill, Democratic Senators this week have tried to play both sides of the ball. On one side, they indicate they have the votes to sustain a presidential veto. But on the other, as Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has outlined, the Democrats will also put forth a series of amendments they argue would make the fossil fuel project, if it does goes forward, more politically palatable.
As Politico summarized on Monday, the Democratic amendments would:
Ban the export of oil transported through the pipeline, language that Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) has frequently floated in both chambers of Congress;
Require U.S.-produced iron, steel and manufactured goods to be used for the pipeline construction, connection, operation, and maintenance. Its another familiar measure that senators like Markey and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) have offered.
Require that for every job created by the pipeline, an equal or greater amount of jobs is created through clean energy investments. Schumer and Stabenow highlight legislation from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) that would cut the price of home solar units through rebates.
Restore funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program to levels authorized in the 2009 economic stimulus bill under the condition that seniors and veterans get first priority.
Prohibit a state from permitting a foreign corporation to invoke eminent domain.
Groups opposed to the pipeline, however, told Common Dreams that even as they recognize the bipartisan politics now at play, there are no simply no amendments added or so-called "improvements" made to the bill which would justify unleashing the amount of climate and environmental damage the pipeline represents.
...She added, "I understand why the Democrats want to use a high profile moment to lift up issues like renewable energy and eminent domain abuse." Kleeb was acknowledging what many analysts have pointed out, that the minority Democratsalready with an eye toward 2016are using their amendments to get GOP members on the record opposing job creation, green energy initiatives, and help for low-income families.
However, she added, "Our families are not bargaining chips. We are not horse traders." Kleeb said that she and Bold Nebraska members would continue to stand with President Obama so long as he continues to move in the direction of rejecting "Keystone XL once and for all."
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/01/06/lipstick-pipeline-no-way-oil-soaked-congress-can-improve-kxl
Also see~
Democrats Are Doing Republicans a Favor by Pretending Keystone Is About Jobs
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120694/democrats-counter-gop-keystone-bill-environmental-amendments
jwirr
(39,215 posts)bill. First of all they know that the Rs are not going to pass any of this stuff. The amendments are there not to make the pipeline look better but to show it up for what it is. They will be proposed to show Democratic opposition to the pipeline and to highlight the jobs lie that the Rs are pushing.
This is a way to fight this bill. Make it a mockery of those pushing it as a jobs bill. I for one think the idea is brilliant. Listed to Ed Schultz last night and at first I felt like there was nothing we could do but then they started telling us what some of those amendments were going to say.
The person I as Minnesotan am most upset about is Amy Klobuchar's belief that there is some redeeming value to the pipeline. If she thinks she is making political hay she is incorrect. Enough Amy. Get back on our side of the aisle.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)I'll try to go with your view.
But its disappointing the devastating environmental impact of this wasn't brought up by our side.
Because that is the real problem. And if Pres Obama is going to veto it anyways, and that veto has the votes to be upheld, why do we need these amendments?
(Re: Amy K, that's really disappointing!! Didn't know about that, thanks.)
jwirr
(39,215 posts)environmental impact. As I said I do not think they are meant to support the bill but to mock it.