Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
GOP Still Pushing Tar Sands Pipeline
House Speaker Boehner: 'We are going to do everything we can to try to make sure that this Keystone pipeline is, in fact, approved.'
Speaking on Sunday, House Speaker John Boehner indicated that he may again try to tie the Keystone XL pipeline project to the payroll tax cut.
The Huffington Post reports this morning on Boehner speaking with "Fox News Sunday" on trying to bring back the pipeline project:
(photo: Mattias Gugel/Medill)
"The Keystone pipeline is the prime example of a shovel-ready project that has been through every approval process here in Washington," he told "Fox News Sunday." "Every option is on the table. We are going to do everything we can to try to make sure that this Keystone pipeline is, in fact, approved."
Asked by host Chris Wallace whether he would try to "link" the pipeline to extending the payroll tax holiday for an additional 10 months after it expires at the end of February, Boehner replied,"We may. But as I said, all options are on the table."
Dow Jones newswires report:
Congressional lawmakers hope to reach an agreement soon on how to extend a reduced federal payroll tax rate as well as jobless benefits for long-term unemployed people. The current tax rate and benefits program both expire at the end of February.
At the same time, Republicans are urging President Barack Obama to approve the construction of the so-called Keystone XL pipeline that would transport oil and natural gas from Alberta down to refineries in Texas.
Boehner may have been hinting at the possibility of Congress using powers to pass the proposal despite Obama's executive power. The Hill explains the Congressional Research Service's (CRS) findings:
The Jan. 20 CRS legal analysis notes that while the executive branch has historically handled the approval of border-crossing facilities, it doesn’t have to be that way. “[I]f Congress chose to assert its authority in the area of border crossing facilities, this would likely be considered within its Constitutionally enumerated authority to regulate foreign commerce,” the analysis states.
Republicans are highly unlikely to have enough political support to win Senate passage of bills that require a permit, let alone Obama’s signature. But the CRS analysis may buoy Republicans rallying around the bills to attack Obama’s Jan. 18 denial of TransCanada Corp.’s permit application.
The four CRS attorneys write that their review “suggests that legislation related to cross-border facility permitting is unlikely to raise significant constitutional questions, despite the fact that such permits have traditionally been handled by the executive branch alone pursuant to its constitutional ‘foreign affairs’ authority.”
A House Energy and Commerce Committee panel will hold a hearing next Wednesday on Rep. Lee Terry’s (R-Neb.) bill that takes review of the pipeline away from the State Department and instead requires the independent Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to issue a permit.
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.), who is planning a separate bill to put approval in the hands of Congress, requested the study.
“I think this confirms what we have been saying all along – Congress has the authority under the Constitution to approve the Keystone pipeline,” said Ryan Bernstein, Hoeven’s deputy chief of staff and legal counsel. “It gives great weight to not only our bill but any bill Congress considers,” he added.



36 Comments so far
Show All*portion inaudible due to wild, enthusiastic and inappropriate applause and cheering from the holier-than-thou Prius driving, vegetarian-by-choice, card-carrying wholly Corporate co-opted Greenpeace membership and other environmentalists* during which Obama continues sotto voce "... at this time."
To hell with cutting the modest social security tax and to hell with developing tar sands. No to both.
This "payroll tax cut", favored by Obama, is a very bad idea for Social Security, presented ala Orwell as a good thing for working people, and is an excuse for allowing tar sands development.
It is not a hatred of Obama personally, but a recognition of his forked tongue policies Most of us would have loved to find Obama at least as centrist as Eisenhower. If you have time, you should watch the Bill Moyers video on the right side of the page. It explains how, when it comes to the banks and brokerages, the privatization agenda, Obama is even worse than Bush was.
Absolutely true. The MYTHS of the MIDDLE EASTERN DESERT to the rescue!!!!
Hey, "Common Dreams staff."
The pipeline project has not gone away. You seem to have fallen for the scam. Obama Inc. rejected the "deadline", not the pipeline.
In NO way did Obama cancel the pipeline. He postponed a decision, which actually means that he has no intention of canceling the pipeline. He's just trying to keep the decision from hurting his re-election.
The PRETENSE of the two party system is what Obama needs, even as he and his blue-dog brained party continue to work with their republican allies to destroy the constitution.
Also, the democrat's payroll tax reduction scheme is an attack on Social Security. So, to tie these two assaults together is only a way for the republicans to show Wall Street that the difference between them and the democrats is the blatantness of their sadistic maneuvering.
Is Common Dreams out to become another Huff-Post?
"constitutional"
Both of these "projects" are about destroying the well-being of people for corporate profits.
The republicans do not see any reason not to put these things together BECAUSE the agenda is the same in both cases. The reason the democrats want them separate is because the democrats are dependent upon the illusion that they are different.
Both of these projects and both of these parties are there for the benefit the corporate owners.
NONE of them deserve support.
Someone, somewhere, with a shred of integrity left, needs to put the questions to them directly (that is, IN THEIR FACE): Hey, fascist pig senator, where will all the oil go that gets pumped down to the Gulf? Hey lying, phony, stuffed shirt senator, how much of America's daily consumption of oil will this pipeline carry? Hey dirty, evil, crap-eating, humanity-hating, Earth-destroying parasite, how much money are you receiving for your support of this project?"
The mainstream press has reduced everything to a blue-red political debate. No one even asks the pertinent questions, just make it a D vs R debate and call it good. They all should stand before the altar of the Almighty and account for their blatant lying.
Better yet, people who know better and who care, need to hold their feet to the fire on this issue and not let them dodge the truth. It's not just global climate change at stake here, though the tar sands development represent a fatal blow to any attempts to address that vital concern. The project makes no sense in any other regard, either, except to enrich the 1 percenters at the expense of the planet and humanity.
When push comes to shove, the project if it continues to proceed (which it almost no doubt will) must be stopped on the ground. Time to put the lattes down and take the gloves off - seriously. Not all "environmentalists" are "elitists." Some are down and dirty Haydukes who will punch you in the eye if you call them an elitist.
Don't doubt it for an instant.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Noel Brinkerhoff, David Wallechinsky
In the wake of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, BP’s stock value has plummeted, prompting news stories identifying the company’s largest investors. Oddly enough, some media outlets have failed to identify the largest BP shareholder: the U.S. investment firm JPMorgan Chase.
According to the European financial database Amadeus, JPMorgan Chase is the No. 1 holder of stock in BP. That distinction also has earned the Wall Street bank the title of “Global Ultimate Owner” of the oil giant, as it owns 28.34% of BP. Next, at 7.99%, is Legal and General Group, a British-based financial services company with assets of more than $350 billion. Another U.S. investment firm, BlackRock Inc., owns 7.1% of BP. Other owners include the governments of Kuwait, Norway, Singapore and China.
See: http://www.allgov.com/Top_Stories/ViewNews/Who_Owns_BP__Biggest_Sharehol...
Any questions?
Only 17 months before BP's Deepwater Horizon rig suffered a deadly blowout in the Gulf of Mexico, another BP deepwater oil platform also blew out.
You've heard and seen much about the Gulf disaster that killed 11 BP workers. If you have not heard about the earlier blowout, it's because BP has kept the full story under wraps. Nor did BP inform Congress or US safety regulators, and BP, along with its oil industry partners, have preferred to keep it that way.
The earlier blowout occurred in September 2008 on BP's Central Azeri platform in the Caspian Sea.
As one memo marked "secret" puts it, "Given the explosive potential, BP was quite fortunate to have been able to evacuate everyone safely and to prevent any gas ignition." The Caspian oil platform was a spark away from exploding, but luck was with the 211 rig workers.
It was eerily similar to the Gulf catastrophe as it involved BP's controversial "quick set" drilling cement.
The question we have to ask: If BP had laid out the true and full facts to Congress and regulators about the earlier blowout, would those 11 Gulf workers be alive today - and the Gulf Coast spared oil-spill poisons?
Any other questions?
See complete story at: http://www.truthout.org/node/1239
"JJW"
The democrats and the libertarians are owned by the same corporate powers as the republicans.
To think otherwise is to invite further degradation.