Confession time: When thousands of protesters hit Washington, D.C., last summer to tell the White House to say N-O to the Keystone XL pipeline … well, I wasn’t optimistic.
I was gladdened, certainly, to see so many people disrupting their lives and risking arrest and in many cases getting arrested, to stand up for Mother Earth.
But I wasn’t optimistic about their chances of convincing the White House to go against anything Big Oil wanted so much.
This is, after all, a White House that appointed the likes of Rahm Emanuel and William Daley – conservative Democrats whose sympathies lie with Wall Street far more than Main Street.
Imagine my surprise, then, to read an Associated Press story on Wednesday that began like this: “WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama says he’s denying an application for a Canada-to-Texas oil pipeline …”
Granted, the rest of the lede said the application was rejected “because a GOP-mandated deadline didn’t allow time for a full review.” TransCanada, the company that wants to build the Canadian oilsands pipeline to Texas, could get approval if it applies again.
Still, pipeline opponents can count this as a win. Not a Super Bowl-level win, but a win nevertheless. Obama has done the right thing, for now.
“The Keystone XL pipeline would have prolonged our dependence on dirty fossil fuels that are polluting our air, land and water, and kept us from stabilizing the climate by moving to a clean energy future,” environmentalist Noah Greenwald said.
“In standing up to the deep-pocketed oil and gas industry today, President Obama heard the voice of the people and gave us new hope that we can set short-term business interests aside to do what’s right for the world and our children,” he added.
The National Resources Defense Council’s president, Frances Beinecke, was more effusive in her praise of the decision. “The pipeline was rejected for all the right reasons,” she declared.
“President Obama put the health and safety of the American people and our air, lands and water – our national interest – above the interests of the oil industry.
“His decision represents a triumph of truth over Big Oil’s bullying tactics and its disinformation campaign with wildly exaggerated jobs claims.”
Um, OK. It is nice that Obama rebuffed the attempt by Big Oil and the Republicans to force a “Yes” on Keystone, but the dragon has not been slain. It will be back. TransCanada has already stated it will apply again.
Everyone should remember that what happened Wednesday is one reversible decision by a President who backed off on improving clean-air standards last summer, and started saying yes to more offshore drilling permits not long after the BP oil catastrophe of 2010.
In this election year, U.S. voters who care about this issue must ask Obama to state plainly his true position on the pipeline. Is he open to approving it as long as Big Oil uses the right words in its next request?
My gut tells me YES, of course Obama is “keeping an open mind” on Keystone. Which is a cynic’s way of saying he may approve it soon after the electorate gives him a second term.
It’s up to “green” citizens of his country to seek solid assurances that he won’t, and then be vigilant.
Mike,
Like you, I was surprised and delighted with Obama’s ruling. I am encouraged that he is no longer being bullied into submission by the lying conservative Republicans. We need this current trend to continue!
Perhaps I shouldn’t have used the word bullying in my post. Yes, the Repub/Oil move was bullying-like. But remember, Obama’s a big boy and his aides are no shrivelling violets; they can fight bareknuckle.
Remember, too, that this is only one decision and it can be reversed later on. Obama has a history of disappointing on environmental issues, like with those proposed clean-air standards that were dropped last summer, so it’s not inconceivable that he could cave on this issue too. He has to be pressed into saying outright that he won’t support Keystone XL, period.
I see the word bullying is used in a quote. I won’t beat myself up for using it, then.
One thing to remember is that TransCanada is not the one that wanted the immediate ruling that was pushed in Congress. That was pushed through by the Republicans more for as a political maneuver as anything else. If Obama ruled for the pipeline, then they get what they want and if he doesn’t the Republicans get to show during the election that Obama is not the president that creates jobs because he turned down the pipeline.
TransCanada was not complete on their engineering studies and didn’t have the route finalized especially through the state of Nebraska. So they were surprised by Congress as much as anyone.
IMHO, what will happen is that TransCanada will complete their study showing their concerns for the MidWest farm belt, Obama will then rule that the needed concerns for the environment have been addressed, so he can rule in favor of the pipeline… but it will be after the election.
Once again, Obama will have positioned himself so that he can look like the pragmatist leader, making the hard decisions, after the “hard fought compromises” were obtained. But I wouldn’t be surprised if the plan has already been negotiated with TransCanada.
Yes, a bit of theater for an election year. Delicious popcorn in the lobby, folks! Get it before the show starts!
I don’t think it actually has anything at all to do with Rethugs Congressional extortion. It think it has eveything to do with election season. I don’t for a minute hope that this Godman Sachs hack will give in ultimately. He’s holding out for more? Nasty of me, I realize. But that’s the pattern. Jack is right, the current trend needs to continue. I think the only folks who’ll bring Obama to bear on these issues while he campaigns will be the OCCUPIERS and protesters who manage to mount a motion at his whistle stops. Period. I plan to be one. Loud and proud. Good post, Mike. From your end to the end of the line down here / XL proposed snake through / it’s really a profiteering operation for big oil the will only provide abundance for the big oil companies. Canadians and Americans will certainly suffer the loss of more healthy environment.