Seeking Alpha

Senate Democrats consider Keystone pipeline vote next week

  • A U.S. Senate vote on the Keystone XL pipeline (TRP) as soon as next week reportedly is under discussion by top Democrats, who are weighing the political implications of holding a vote on approval of the controversial pipeline in defiance of Pres. Obama.
  • A vote on Keystone may offer a strong boost to red-state Democrats in tough races this fall, allowing them to be seen as defying the White House in support of a project viewed favorably back home.
  • An aide to Louisiana Sen. Landrieu, the new Senate Energy Committee chair who has frequently criticized Obama for delaying a decision on Keystone, says she will push for a binding vote to approve the project.
Comments (53)
  • monmon
    , contributor
    Comments (13) | Send Message
     
    americans need jobs!!!!!!!!!!
    28 Apr, 07:23 PM Reply Like
  • BioDoubt
    , contributor
    Comments (16) | Send Message
     
    Yay for temp jobs!
    28 Apr, 07:41 PM Reply Like
  • bigbenorr
    , contributor
    Comments (757) | Send Message
     
    Since when is pipelining a temp job??
    28 Apr, 07:56 PM Reply Like
  • Philip Marlowe
    , contributor
    Comments (954) | Send Message
     
    There will only be 10-20 thousand jobs while it is being built. After it is built, it there will be remarkably few long term jobs associated with it. Maybe about 80 or so.
    28 Apr, 08:07 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3314) | Send Message
     
    Obama cannot endorse Keystone.

     

    The jobs are high paying jobs, not Gov't funded, and cannot support his agenda of class warfare (minimum wage outcries) & government control of the sheeple.

     

    Enjoy the "Hope & Change" the Chinese will enjoy the energy security, when Canada's patience wears out.
    28 Apr, 08:45 PM Reply Like
  • BioDoubt
    , contributor
    Comments (16) | Send Message
     
    Ohh yeah I forgot, this pipeline is of infinite distance. Permanent jobs everywhere!
    The Fox News crew is out in force tonight!
    28 Apr, 09:03 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3314) | Send Message
     
    If sure all the families of the dead in Lac Megantic agree with you. .
    28 Apr, 09:09 PM Reply Like
  • Wow72
    , contributor
    Comments (426) | Send Message
     
    1980XLS
    I totally agree, on class warfare, I think his intention is to keep wages down, so technology cant compete as much.... I just don't see it as a solution... Another "Free" trade agreement announced??
    28 Apr, 09:27 PM Reply Like
  • rheimerl
    , contributor
    Comments (347) | Send Message
     
    and your point is????
    28 Apr, 10:02 PM Reply Like
  • TAS
    , contributor
    Comments (2040) | Send Message
     
    About 80.

     

    Not 91, Phillip?

     

    I am hopeful that Phillip will share his true stock portfolio with me, so I can take the opposite trades. I dream of folks like him.
    28 Apr, 10:20 PM Reply Like
  • Philip Marlowe
    , contributor
    Comments (954) | Send Message
     
    I did not make that number up, I saw it in a study. By the way, I posted a link to a Cornell university study about the jobs that would result from Keystone and SA deleted my post. Thank you SA editors!

     

    TAS if you had done this last year you would be in the red for over 60% now. It would be more of a nightmare.
    28 Apr, 10:37 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3629) | Send Message
     
    Isn't having those 10-20 thousand jobs (if temporary, or not) better than not having those 10-20 thousand jobs at all?
    28 Apr, 10:42 PM Reply Like
  • AZ Desert Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (232) | Send Message
     
    Rush is that you?!?!?!?
    28 Apr, 11:53 PM Reply Like
  • bigbenorr
    , contributor
    Comments (757) | Send Message
     
    Pipeliners are highly skilled individuals, you make it sound like TRP is going to pick them up from a temp office. I doubt that Keystone will marginally increase the number of trained pipeliners in the USA, but it will be one more project for these guys to continue supporting their families. I am not saying that in itself is a reason to proceed with the project or anything, but its not right to call them "temp jobs"
    29 Apr, 05:30 AM Reply Like
  • Albert Alfonso
    , contributor
    Comments (1390) | Send Message
     
    It is a shame that the keystone pipeline has become such a political football. Canadian producers are now having to use rails to get the product to market. How is this more environmentally friendly?
    28 Apr, 07:27 PM Reply Like
  • King Rat
    , contributor
    Comments (610) | Send Message
     
    If ASEAN was smart, they'd be lining up to buy Canadian oil.
    28 Apr, 08:11 PM Reply Like
  • Fracjob
    , contributor
    Comments (1145) | Send Message
     
    No reason that a vocal minority of voters should dictate U.S. energy policy, and for that matter, U.S. security. Now, time for Canada to get their own house in order, if I may, in regard to pipelines and what is best for citizens.
    28 Apr, 07:44 PM Reply Like
  • bobby44
    , contributor
    Comments (189) | Send Message
     
    It is not about jobs. it is not about the environment. It is not even about energy. it is about fooling the people and getting their asses back into the cushy chairs in Washington. Please leave reason at the door!
    28 Apr, 07:44 PM Reply Like
  • davidbdc
    , contributor
    Comments (3150) | Send Message
     
    So they want to take a vote that won't mean anything, but can use to try to fool the people that will vote in the next election?

     

    Yep, business as usual in DC.
    28 Apr, 07:56 PM Reply Like
  • heybobk
    , contributor
    Comments (16) | Send Message
     
    Uhhh...it's a "binding vote" they are pushing for.
    28 Apr, 08:12 PM Reply Like
  • Charles A. Smith
    , contributor
    Comments (1088) | Send Message
     
    Yes, a binding vote, but Dems will be sure to have enough votes AGAINST the pipeline from "safe" districts so that it cannot pass. This way the Senators in danger of being voted out of office for opposing Keystone can vote in favor when there is NO REAL CHANCE of passage. All about appearances in the liar's club we call Congress.
    28 Apr, 08:23 PM Reply Like
  • phxcrane
    , contributor
    Comments (415) | Send Message
     
    It won't pass and the democrats know it. Their voting so the democratic senators can vote yes and not really mean anything. Its funny people just don't get it. But you get the politicians you deserve.
    28 Apr, 08:28 PM Reply Like
  • davidbdc
    , contributor
    Comments (3150) | Send Message
     
    "binding vote"

     

    You mean like all those other "binding votes" to reduce Medicaid and Medicare reimbursement rates???? That gets overturned every year!

     

    Or those "binding votes" to reduce spending in 10 years? Or 5 years or any year other than this year!!!

     

    I could go on and on but I think you get the point. The idea that any of these folks care about anything other than their own re-election is a joke.
    28 Apr, 09:56 PM Reply Like
  • joeduck
    , contributor
    Comments (16) | Send Message
     
    Love to see it approved. However, do not believe that Landrieu's public position is nothing more than a political ploy to get re-elected.
    28 Apr, 08:28 PM Reply Like
  • bollicks
    , contributor
    Comments (5) | Send Message
     
    Just go back in history 50 yrs and look at the US Bases built in Canada, we didn't oppose those projects and welcomed its benefits it had for the local economies although it was much more beneficial for the US in terms of security. I don't understand why oil can't be viewed in a similar light.
    28 Apr, 08:28 PM Reply Like
  • bollicks
    , contributor
    Comments (5) | Send Message
     
    Just go back in history 50 yrs and look at the US Bases built in Canada, we didn't oppose those projects and welcomed its benefits it had for the local economies although it was much more beneficial for the US in terms of security. I don't understand why oil can't be viewed in a similar light.
    28 Apr, 08:28 PM Reply Like
  • broker bob
    , contributor
    Comments (8) | Send Message
     
    Read "Extortion" by Peter Schweitzer and it will all become clear, especially the delay. Both sides are reaping enormous contributions for their re-election war chests, so the longer they can drag it out the richer the politicians and their Political Action Groups become. They are extorting money from those special interest groups on both sides of the issue. It's business as usual in the cesspool of politics in DC.
    28 Apr, 08:57 PM Reply Like
  • Pathfinder's
    , contributor
    Comments (119) | Send Message
     
    Don't expect any truth in facts from the Political Elite Class in Washington. Republican or Democrat are both out of touch with the "American" working class.
    Keystone is the poster child for the environment political $$$$$. and $$$ are all the Politicians really want and understand.

     

    I personally, cannot understand why the majority of the voters do not understand how they are being duped by the Political Class, which included , Corporate America and the Political Class in the major cities, Federal Employee Unions and
    life long Politicians in Washington. Think Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and John McCain, and John Boehner, just to name a few.
    28 Apr, 08:59 PM Reply Like
  • Wow72
    , contributor
    Comments (426) | Send Message
     
    Pathfinders quote:
    "Don't expect any truth in facts from the Political Elite Class in Washington. Republican or Democrat are both out of touch with the "American" working class. "

     

    People need to recognize this...Right on! Couldn't have said it better in two sentences, thanks for a refreshingly honest view!

     

    Have our politicians volunteered a wage cut for the way they have run the country in the past 16 years??? They have done nothing except keep pressure on wages and let corporations replace American labor with as much cheap foreign labor as they want...I want my money back?

     

    They keep the sides wrapped up in arguing as a distraction...
    29 Apr, 05:52 AM Reply Like
  • ianxponent
    , contributor
    Comments (371) | Send Message
     
    Why don't the Canadians just build a pipeline from Alberta through B.C. to their own coast? Oh that's right, Canadians oppose that because of the risk of oil spills! Better to foist a risky pipeline on the suckers to their south. LOL!
    28 Apr, 09:15 PM Reply Like
  • SoldHigh
    , contributor
    Comments (1013) | Send Message
     
    Since you haven't noticed - a number of people have been killed by trains hauling the product, which is the only mode of land-transportation available since the Obamabots refuse to allow the pipeline to built. Greenies would prefer the US remain addicted to Arab oil instead of producing locally.
    28 Apr, 09:24 PM Reply Like
  • davidbdc
    , contributor
    Comments (3150) | Send Message
     
    Actually, that is now in play. Canada mistakenly believed that the USA - being their closest trading partner and ally would agree to build 1100 miles of pipeline in a country with 100's of thousands of miles of pipelines. Only this would be brand spanking new whereas much of the existing infrastructure is old.

     

    If you hate oil and gas so much - go out and create an alternative that is economically better. Then you'll win. Using politics to enrich and delay is a disgrace.
    28 Apr, 09:38 PM Reply Like
  • lorneb
    , contributor
    Comments (147) | Send Message
     
    What the opponents in Canada are concerned about is not the pipeline so much as it is the shipment offshore that is their greatest concern. The fear is that ships in northern waters are high risk for a number of reasons. They think of the Exxon Valdez even though that was an older ship of comparatively inferior design to what will be used by current day plans. The northern waters are colder and pristine. They support an important ecological and fishery and other wildlife habitat. As for your suggestion of "suckers in the south", that is an unrealistic and negative statement. The KXL pipeline simply has a purpose of satisfying an established need in a more beneficial way than imports from offshore and for rail transport. The oil sands will be developed and will help feed the US need or desire for oil one way or another. The wisest thing we could all do is try to reduce our reliance on excessive energy consumption rather than fooling ourselves into thinking we can reduce consumption by not building a pipeline. It is unrealistic to think stopping that pipeline will accomplish anything in the way of benefits for the environmental movement. I find it amazing how so many people think they are fighting to save the environment yet still use so many products that are made from petroleum and natural gas. still ride around in vehicles public or otherwise that rely to at least some extent on petroleum and enjoy eating food which relys on petroleum for its production and transport to point of consumption. Come up with a way of accomplishing the needs and wants of life with out petroleum and then you will be perhaps doing something of value to reduce the need for so many pipelines. Until then-----.
    29 Apr, 02:16 AM Reply Like
  • aeroguy48
    , contributor
    Comments (623) | Send Message
     
    The Keystone pipeline would push out heavy oil from Saudi Arabia and Venezuela, obama opposes it nuff said.
    28 Apr, 09:42 PM Reply Like
  • dhemke
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    our so called "representatives" only take up a vote when it benefits their well being, not ours.
    28 Apr, 10:01 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3629) | Send Message
     
    What about those birds who can't sleep at night with the lights from the project? Are we just going to toss them in the trash, and hope we get new birds that like the light?

     

    Stand up for our avian brothers and sisters!
    28 Apr, 10:30 PM Reply Like
  • aretailguy
    , contributor
    Comments (1053) | Send Message
     
    Enough already! Just let the Chinese buy it. We would rather buy oil from friendly "Democratic" countries like, um, Venezuela and Nigeria and Libya. Oh, and while we are at it, lets not ship any of our nat gas to Europe so that they are completely dependent on Russia for nat gas. That should work out swell. When will the sheeple ever wake up?
    29 Apr, 12:13 AM Reply Like
  • ellaruth
    , contributor
    Comments (164) | Send Message
     
    http://bit.ly/1nYbiiY

     

    Where were the Senate majority when billions went to Brazil for oil development and primary job creation? Perhaps an amendment to repatriate our billions loaned to Petrobas and apply what is collected as a loan to the Keystone Pipeline development should be part of the bill to be voted on.
    29 Apr, 01:00 AM Reply Like
  • ellaruth
    , contributor
    Comments (164) | Send Message
     
    http://bit.ly/1nYf3VL

     

    After the Obama White House failed to retain, what was and still is arguably the most prospective US solar technology. Its corporate chieftain was invited to the White House to help them understand how the Obama Administration missed the boat. Not Fox but ABC News covered the story! http://abcn.ws/1nYf4c0

     

    Connect the dots. A focus like a laser President, who hypes failed alternative energy companies, miserably fails to identify the one solar technology that has a major contribution to make toward solar achieving grid parity. Earlier after having run for office on a clean energy platform, during which he urged Americans to borrow from China in order to jumpstart alternative energy green jobs, he then loans billions to Brazil's Petrobas in order to aid them to produce offshore Oil to ship primarily to China.

     

    More recently after such a huge litany of failures, he seems to cautiously embrace natural gas, making coal the almost blame all villain then he acts as though the keystone pipeline is an issue for cautious delay. Remember loaning billions of stimulus money to Petrobas was a post haste bright charming thing to do.

     

    Is there a mental health diagnosis that wraps around this kind of behavior?
    29 Apr, 01:35 AM Reply Like
  • samdhale
    , contributor
    Comments (9) | Send Message
     
    Mr. Obama's backing funding for Petrobas was not for the benefit of Petrobas per se but in fact to backstop George Soros who funded Obama's run for the white house. Soros, at the time, had over $5 billion invested in Petrobas,

     

    Obama is still paying off his debt to Soros by denying the pipeline to be built.

     

    This is the way I see it. I don't think Obama will change his course of delay until Mr. Soros gives him the O.K to do so.
    29 Apr, 08:27 AM Reply Like
  • bigbenorr
    , contributor
    Comments (757) | Send Message
     
    I wonder if Soros sold out of PBR. If not he got super hosed....
    29 Apr, 10:03 AM Reply Like
  • DonSimon
    , contributor
    Comments (76) | Send Message
     
    The amount of oil that pipeline will send us from Canada will be enough for us to stop buying it from our amigos the Venezuelans. That alone is worth it. Also we keep hearing that it will be exported. Some of it will, but the bulk will be the refined product from that oil. Refining that oil creates more jobs etc.
    I live in Louisiana, landrieu is a political person just like her boss and comes from a political dynasty. Her dad was a corrupt mayor of New Orleans once, her brother currently is the mayorthere. She NOW pushes the pipeline for political survival this November election. Outside of that she is an Obama lap dog voting lockstep with the Democrat's agenda.
    She was the deciding vote for Obamacare, a vote she sold for a $100 million "gift" to Louisiana.
    Yep a real politician
    29 Apr, 09:47 AM Reply Like
  • Captain America
    , contributor
    Comments (40) | Send Message
     
    This might be a dumb question, but why does the connection of the Keystone pipeline to Canada matter at this point? With the big increase in oil production from the Bakken, isn't the Gulf Coast and the storage in Cushing already awash in oil? Isn't there so much crude oil on the Gulf Coast now that the refineries don't have the ability to process it all? What is the benefit of importing this Canadian crude when it appears there is already a big over supply? Isn't this why the Bakken producers are sending oil out by rail to refineries in the midwest and east coast?
    29 Apr, 07:52 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3629) | Send Message
     
    They should build more refineries to handle all the NA oil we can process.
    29 Apr, 08:12 PM Reply Like
  • aretailguy
    , contributor
    Comments (1053) | Send Message
     
    Captain, there also is the problem of the type of crude the refineries in the gulf coast are built to utilize. They use mostly the heavy crude typical of Venezuela, and the Canadian Sands. Many can not use the very light Bakken or Eagleford or Permian sweet.
    29 Apr, 08:58 PM Reply Like
  • davidbdc
    , contributor
    Comments (3150) | Send Message
     
    Also, Don't underestimate the advantage created by having concentration of industry. I'd much prefer to see the growth in the Gulf region than to have a new competitor in Vancouver. That would eventually lead to Chemical facilities and the formation of all the support industries for both refineries and chemical production.

     

    Much better to enlarge our own industries and create more competitive advantages.
    30 Apr, 10:38 PM Reply Like
  • bigbenorr
    , contributor
    Comments (757) | Send Message
     
    Gulf coast refiners are also still buying Venezuelan crude, although it is declining. If they had access to Canadian crude they could cut out PDVSA altogether.
    29 Apr, 09:10 PM Reply Like
  • Reddale
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    If climate is the issue shouldn't we consider rail and truck transport utilize more energy to move energy than pipelines.

     

    Bluntly put the alternative is America can buy oil from Canadians or just keep paying to have your Fifth Naval Fleet posted in the Gulf protecting the Middle East dictators and the violent groups they fund.

     

    Give Canada a bit of time and we will develop east and west pipelines and the price differentials to WTI will end as alternate customers are developed.

     

    This pipeline debate is political optics, unfortunately President Obama's legacy will be one of long on talk and short on true Presidential substance.

     

    His Hollywood "technical experts" will find another cause after this one.

     

    Red
    30 Apr, 08:58 PM Reply Like
  • ianxponent
    , contributor
    Comments (371) | Send Message
     
    The US gets less than 13% of its oil from the Persian Gulf.
    30 Apr, 11:57 PM Reply Like
  • DonSimon
    , contributor
    Comments (76) | Send Message
     
    Today another rail tanker with crude explodes. Lucky, no casualties. Stay tuned for more as this is the unsafest way to ship crude. Yet the clowns in Washington force it on us for political reason. One day they will learn that the oil WILL be shipped. So why not by pipelines with the best safety records?
    It is a no brainer
    1 May, 10:21 AM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3314) | Send Message
     
    because the clowns in Washington have No brains.

     

    Even worse, the sheeple that keep re-electing the status quo.
    1 May, 10:27 AM Reply Like
  • Charles A. Smith
    , contributor
    Comments (1088) | Send Message
     
    Talk to people at CSX or NSC. They'll inform you that there are severe restrictions on shipping anything hazardous (including crude & NGLs) in and around Washington, DC. One more example of the perfidy of our elected officials. They're happy to foist very real risks on "the great unwashed" in the name of political gain, but never in their back yard.
    1 May, 11:13 AM Reply Like
  • ellaruth
    , contributor
    Comments (164) | Send Message
     
    We have not built an Oil Refinery over 30 years. We need several new ones. Plus open up the Atlantic coast for drilling so that we can help supply Europe.
    2 May, 11:51 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector

Next headline on your portfolio:

|