House authorizes building of Keystone pipeline

[DonViejo]

Source: Washington Post

The House easily passed a measure Friday authorizing construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, sending it on to the Senate where the issue is expected to come up for a vote on Tuesday.

Lawmakers voted 252 to 161 to approve the project. Thirty-one Democrats, including a handful who lost reelection last week, joined with all but one Republican who voted for the bill. Rep. Justin Amash (Mich.), a renegade Republican who frequently bucks his party and top leaders, voted present.

An identical measure is set for debate and a vote Tuesday in the Senate, where Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) forced leaders to permit an up-or-down vote in hopes of settling a long-simmering concern for her state and to help buttress her reelection.

Landrieu faces Rep. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), who was the lead sponsor on Friday's House bill, in a Dec. 6 runoff race for her Senate seat.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/11/14/house-passes-keystone-xl-construction-bill/?wpisrc=al_comboPN_p

[Spazito]

1. Here is a link to the text of the bill...

http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20141110/BILLS-113hr-keystone-HR5682.pdf#page=1&zoom=auto,-99,667

The link goes to the Majority Leader of the House, Kevin McCarthy as I couldn't find the actual text of the bill anywhere else, sorry about that.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

2. If PBO vetoes it, no way they get 67 votes in the senate. At least they'd better not!

[karynnj]

3. Add an amendment to it!

Two reasons:
1) Poison pill - like requiring insurance to cover full cost of likely spills - maybe to pristine wilderness.
2) If it amended and passed, the House needs to pass it again or have a conference committee and then both Houses have to vote. Maybe they can run out the clock?

Ask yourself WWRD - What would Republicans do. They are experts in keeping things from passing - why let them have an easy pass. (Not to mention, giving them an easy pass on this will validate their claim that the House passed lots of things that Reid blocked without reason. )

[staggerleem]

4. But who has to be the insurer?

Do you want to be in the business of insuring nuclear power plants against catastrophic malfunction? Well, too damn bad, because we ALL are! The U.S. Government (i. e., the TAXPAYERS) provide that insurance, thanks to the Price-Anderson act.

So, I'm sure that the Rethugs will have no problem sticking us with that responsibility, as well. Hell, from their point of view, anything that might bankrupt the Government is as GOOD thing.

[karynnj]

5. If it is the case that the company is NOT the responsible person - make it known

I think when there was an oil spill in the Gulf, there was mention of insurance being inadequate - which means there was insurance.

I still think that at minimum calling for something like this would make people think of both the cost and the ecological damage -- for almost NO GAIN for the country. Make them justify it.

[Recursion]

13. Landrieu made it a privileged motion, so no amendments (nt)

[peoli]

6. These people hate Earth and life.

[hibbing]

7. Yeah!! Free gas for everyone!

Now that we all have free healthcare, we will all get free gas. I'll go shop for giant SUV when this thing gets built. Or better yet, maybe I'll see if I can get one of those military vehicles that all of our police departments have these days. What is next on the agenda?

Peace

[Dont call me Shirley]

8. My legislator voted........a big NO!

[blkmusclmachine]

9. Inhofe: "I'm not concerned about the environment. God'll take care of it."

[geomon666]

10. Proof once again that there is no difference between Democrats and Shitheads

[JonLP24]

11. A bigger issue are the oil trains

The pipeline tries to avoid water & wetlands but these trains go right through down towns, along the Pugent Sound. They can easily bust & rails aren't designed for their kind of traffic. The potential effects are disastrous. They're shredding regs, don't care about investing in technology to make it safer. Just get as much tar sands as quickly to the refinery as possible without taking time or the expense to buy more expensive safer carts.

Ideal it would be no trains or pipelines -- keep that dirty flammable oil in the ground but its not going to happen. If the pipeline decreases the need then this is good news but either way it needs to be addressed, especially if you have genuine concerns for the environment & explosions.

[Baclava]

14. but how many pipelines do they need?

[Nye Bevan]

12. Influenced by the unions, perhaps?

http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/afl-cio-urges-approval-of-keystone-xl-pipeline/article/2555805

[Quantess]

15. K & R