Republicans to Continue Push for Keystone Pipeline & American Jobs
Posted by Jim Hoft on Sunday, February 5, 2012, 9:29 AM
US Fought & Won World War II In Less Time Than It Took Democrats to Approve Keystone Pipeline
Republicans this week promised to continue to push for the Keystone Pipeline and American jobs.
Republicans are pressing the case for the Keystone Pipeline despite Democrat objections.
FOX News reported:
Republicans are gearing up for another showdown over the Canada-to-Texas Keystone pipeline, pushing a bill that would compel approval of the project after President Obama denied a critical permit.
The Obama administration has not killed the pipeline. Rather, Obama claimed last month that Republicans did not give his administration enough time when they pushed for a permitting decision within 60 days — the president denied that permit, presumably sidelining the issue at the height of campaign season as the company TransCanada scrambles to reapply.
But Republicans, who have assailed Obama’s decision as bad for the economy and bad for energy security, want to get the project back on the rails.
They plan to make an end run around the State Department, which typically has jurisdiction over cross-border permits, and are teeing up a committee vote for Tuesday on a bill that would do just that.
“It’s time for Congress to take this decision out of the president’s hands and take the politics out of a commonsense pipeline that will bring economic and energy security,” Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said in a statement.
Republicans’ proposed bill would hand the permitting issue over the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. It would direct the group to approve the permit within 30 days, as well as a proposed re-routing of the pipeline’s Nebraska section following a review by that state.
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Featured Story:
Horrible… Obama Tells Foolish Supporters: I’m Not Over-Spending… “I’m Running to Pay Down Our Debt”
Published May 23, 2012 at 11:51 pm - 52 Comments
bigL commented:
is that the Fred Upton that banned the incandescent Light bulb? Why yes it is.
Gee XL approval will be very successful then.
Karinee commented:
Are you aware that GE just closed its plant in Waukasha Wisconsin and moved it to China?
Way to go GE! Last year your profits were 45 BILLION, AND YOU PAID NO TAXES.
That’s right you are a friend of OBAMA.
valerie commented:
Oh, wow. Robert Reich can articulate part of the problem, but not all of it.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/02/05/INQB1N0SNT.DTL
The analysis in this article is pretty confused, because he’s trying so hard to ignore the big governmental policies that have pushed companies overseas for their operations.
He also assumes that unions represent the best interests of the workers in the United States, which is true only in states with right-to-work laws.
He does ask a pertinent question
Why no lobbyist for creating good jobs in America?
Which, of course frames it poorly, as it must, if he is to support Obama.
http://www.issues2000.org/2012/Newt_Gingrich_Jobs.htm
“For the president and a large part of the political class, it’s about their power, their right to rule. That’s why so much of that nearly trillion-dollar stimulus didn’t create jobs but just went into the pockets of special interests who support Obama and the Democratic Party.”
bg commented:
++
“Utterly irrational”
==
bg commented:
++
Republicans are all puff, no punch..
Obama might as well be paying them, oh wait..
we’re paying all of them to cohort against US..
==
bg commented:
++
February 4, 2012
Newt Gingrich, Post Caucus Rally, Nevada
February 3, 2012
another great Gingrich interview via Greta
[the title is totally misleading, Newt Gingrich talks about
Israel, Iran, Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, etc.. as well]
==
valerie commented:
Why most US Manufacturing Jobs are gone forever
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2012/02/03/Why-Most-US-Manufacturing-Jobs-Are-Gone-Forever.aspx#page1
Well, not really. Things could change.
This article has some factual information, but is also full of assumptions, principally that the regulatory environment is not going to change, and that our regulatory environment must necessarily continue to discourage manufacturing in this country.
These assumptions need to be re-examined.
The EPA is an agency that has largely accomplished its original mission, and it has been running out of things to do. So, it has been busy trying to find new tasks, which left to itself, it has interpreted as finding new things to regulate such as the elements of the periodic table.
The EPA needs guidance, which it certainly has not been getting from the Chief Executive, or Congress. I suggest a new phase of the EPA’s original mission (to clean up pollutants), on the principle that “the job isn’t finished until the paperwork is done.”
The EPA needs to report on
1) how its regulations have impacted the environment of the US, including the economic effects, and
2) what an approvable manufacturing plan should look like.
Granny commented:
#4 February 5, 2012 at 9:47 am
Karinee commented:
Are you aware that GE just closed its plant in Waukasha Wisconsin and moved it to China?
Way to go GE! Last year your profits were 45 BILLION, AND YOU PAID NO TAXES.
That’s right you are a friend of OBAMA.
_________
You should see Pittsfield, Massachusetts – home to GE for most of a century. This is the plant where the US Army battle tanks were developed in the 80s. Acres – really several square miles – of abandoned factory buildings rusting away occupy the heart of the city, which has been literally devastated economically as GE moved more and more operations elsewhere. (The entire city was literally dependent on GE for employment.) The schools are built atop hazardous waste dumps, Silver Lake is so polluted it may never again be clean. The entire city is a Super Fund site . . . and you know who is paying for what clean up goes on, right?
valerie commented:
Gingrich proposes a new agency along the lines I would like. I would simply give the EPA a new mission, because there is a reservoir of knowledge and experience in that agency that would be instructive. I don’t want to lose that reservoir before it has been applied to the question of what an acceptable manufacturing plant would look like.
http://ontheissues.org/Celeb/Newt_Gingrich_Environment.htm
Replace EPA with new Environmental Solutions Agency
I don’t think the EPA bureaucrats, who are dedicated to a Washington centered, top down, bureaucratic control by litigation and regulation, are going learn a new dance, a new approach, and a new model. This is double true because Obama wants to use EPA t control carbon, so he can control all of the non-health economy.
Now a new Environmental Solutions Agency, I believe, would do a better job of both protecting the environment and the economy. The principles are straightforward, localism when possible. I believe that incentives, innovators, and entrepreneurs will solve environmental problems, and improve the environment better than the bureaucrats, regulators and litigators.
The new Environmental Solutions Agency should see communities, states, and industries as partners, not adversaries in solving problems when one approaches. The Environmental Solutions Agency should look for new science, new technologies, and new approaches to get more energy, more jobs, and a better environment simultaneously.
valerie commented:
#11 I forgot to put in the quote marks, namely to everything below the copy of the link.
bg commented:
++
valerie #11 February 5, 2012 at 10:40 am
stop “studies” find “solutions”, Amen..
==
valerie commented:
Remember all that cr@p the New York Times published about how Dick Cheney was busy directly enriching Halliburton? My daddy does. He knew, knew, I tell you! that Dick Cheney was corruptly influencing Halliburton’s fortunes, he just couldn’t see his way to proving it.
Yeah. He admitted the proof wasn’t there, but he still hasn’t given up.
The New York Times has now decided that it can do the same thing to Newt Gingrich via his involvement with Fannie Mae.
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/03/nyt-gingrichs-ties-to-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-are-deeper-than-you-think/
When the New York Times did a similar hit job on Darryl Issa, the local paper fact-checked it and refused to print it absent revision and explanation. When New York Times readers wrote the San Diego Union-Tribune about its failure to publish the article, the Union-Tribune published a couple of articles about its problems with the original.
There is no similar restraint on the New York Times, when it comes to politicians at the national level. That’s a pity, because Hot Air could have used the help.
bg commented:
++
valerie #14 February 5, 2012 at 10:56 am
albeit a technicality, factually speaking, it was
Freddie Mac, not Fannie Mae.. but whatever..
[In contrast, neither NBC nor any other broadcast outlet would have needed to search hard for political ties in the Fannie Mae debacle. Former Chief Executive Officer Franklin Raines and former Vice Chairman Jamie Gorelick were both instrumental figures in the Clinton administration. The print media were candid about Fannie’s political connections. In a Dec. 23, 2004, article, Albert Crenshaw of The Washington Post revealed that Franklin Raines “was a director of the Office of Management and Budget in the Clinton administration, and his name was mentioned as a possible Treasury Secretary had Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) been elected president.”
Jamie Gorelick was Deputy Attorney General under Clinton. Fannie Mae board member Jack Quinn was the attorney for pardoned tax evader Marc Rich. Fannie also has one of the largest lobbying budgets in Washington. A Feb. 24, 2005, article in The Washington Post reported that Fannie “paid its lobbying corps about $5 million in the first six months of last year.”
According to Jeff Bliss of Bloomberg.com, Fannie Mae spent almost $8.7 million on lobbyists in 2003. In May of 2004, Citizens Against Government Waste criticized Fannie for “heavy handed meddling in the legislative process to protect the company’s congressional protected status and its lavish corporate welfare program.”
The connections were there, but broadcast news was uninterested.]
==
bg commented:
++
valerie #14 February 5, 2012 at 10:56 am
re: Cheney – Halliburton
and here’s a Ripley’s for ya (in general): President Clinton & VP
Gore were more entrenched with Halliburton than VP Cheney..
albeit a lost cause, why not have Daddy read them anyways (and tell him
Obama & Ayers are associated with FC/Anneberg, that ought to make it a
bit easier to adsorb, maybe not)..
==
bg commented:
++
re: #16 February 5, 2012 at 11:43 am bg
…The Clinton administration made the same calculation in its own dealings with Halliburton. The company had won the LOGCAP in 1992, then lost it in 1997. The Clinton administration nonetheless awarded a no-bid contract to Halliburton to continue its work in the Balkans supporting the U.S. peacekeeping mission there because it made little sense to change midstream. According to Byron York, Al Gore’s reinventing-government panel even singled out Halliburton for praise for its military logistics work…
shhhhh. it’s still a secret.. gah!!
==
Freddy commented:
Boehner is just trying to get together a few votes for big spending bills!
Once he gets it thru the house, the senate will drop the pipeline part, pass the spending, and semd it back to the house where Boehner and the democrats can pass more spending! These guys are absurdly predictable. This will NOT be the end of the pipeline game as more spending is demanded by Boehner and the democrats.
Can ANYONE tell me what the difference is between having Pelosi or Boehner as speaker?
bg commented:
++
Freddy #18 February 5, 2012 at 12:01 pm
re: [Can ANYONE tell me what the difference is
between having Pelosi or Boehner as speaker?]
no, but i’m almost certain it has nothing to do with the position.. /s/
==
valerie commented:
The TEA Party still has some work to do. Otherwise, the Senate will continue to block bills and fail to pass a budget.
http://www.breitbart.tv/gop-democrat-senate-ignoring-30-jobs-bills/
bg @ 16. Totally lost cause. During the last election, he told me that Bush and Cheney got us into the war in Iraq for the purpose of helping Halliburton make money (!) and I told him that Howell Raines is not a credible source. I also told him that there was a consensus to invade Iraq, and forwarded him clips of all those Democrats supporting the decision. He told me all those clips were bulls!!t.
He’s still mad at me.
Blacque Jacques Shellacque commented:
Republicans are gearing up for another showdown over the Canada-to-Texas Keystone pipeline,…
You’ll have to excuse me if I don’t take this very seriously.
I have little faith that the gutless Republican leadership will actually fight tooth and nail for something they want, like Democrats do for their causes. More often than not, the C-word (compromise) comes up, and then even whatever it is they were supposed to fight for either gets negotiated away or watered down to the point of being almost meaningless.
bg commented:
++
The Republicans
==
bg commented:
++
valerie #20 February 5, 2012 at 1:28 pm
guess he slipped through the “If you’re not a liberal at twenty you have
no heart, if you’re not a conservative at forty you have no brain.” crack..
==
gwhh commented:
This is odd. Old Berry. mostly does not have that much of spin for pressuer against him. Push him a bit and he collpase like the no load he is suit. i think maybe old berry MAY believes in like this green engery crap like al gore does!