U.S House passes deadline bill for Keystone pipeline decision
Wednesday, July 27, 2011 at 9:33 am
- 5 Comments
The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill Tuesday that would require the Obama administration to make a final decision on the expansion of the Keystone XL pipeline by Nov. 1. The vote was 279-147, with Minnesota’s delegation voting along party lines, with two exceptions: Democrat Collin Peterson voted with Republicans, and Rep. Michele Bachmann did not vote.
Friends of the Earth, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Sierra Club quickly responded, calling the move “reckless and politically tainted” in a statement released to the press.
“While the pipeline disaster on the Yellowstone River in Montana is still unfolding, we should not approve a pipeline that isn’t needed, will raise gas prices and threatens drinking water and other resources from the Great Plains to Texas,” said the NRDC’s Susan Casey-Lefkowitz. “This is another example of the House’s anti-environmental agenda, putting politics and special interests ahead of science and common sense.”
Last month, Reps. Keith Ellison and Betty McCollum were among 34 Democrats who wrote a letter to Environmental Protection Agency head Lisa Jackson and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, urging that permitting for the expansion continue only after issues like its greenhouse gas impacts, alternative routes, safety risks and impacts on low-income communities are analyzed.
Whether the bill will receive a vote in the U.S. Senate remains to be seen.
5 Comments
Comment posted July 27, 2011 @ 11:43 am
One of the best things we can do for the environment in this country is to kill this pipeline.
If you don’t already know about it, please google ‘Canada tar sands.’ The oil barons overseeing this environmental catastrophe north of the border hope to expand their profits by running leaky pipes over US territory, jeopardizing ground water, cropland and wildlife.
Comment posted July 27, 2011 @ 1:28 pm
If they’re so anxious to avoid the normal process, that’s a sign the decision should come even sooner than the House’s deadline, and the answer should be no. As if a massive project like this should be rushed.
Comment posted July 27, 2011 @ 4:29 pm
I think this is a huge mistake and should be stopped. These big money people couldn’t care less if they kill the wildlife, humans and poison the water in this beautiful pristine area. The only thing that matters to them is money. They should be told no.
Comment posted July 28, 2011 @ 6:57 am
I am glad you have no use for petroleum products in your world. No cars, no plastic, etc…
Comment posted July 28, 2011 @ 6:16 pm
You people saying no to this are clearly left in the stone ages! This is going to produce thousands of jobs that our country really needs! As for the cons of pulling this pipeline in. The contractors putting the pipeline in spend millions of dollars putting everything back to the way it was before we come to the area with the exception of the trees removed. You complain about leaking pipelines well like everything stuff wears out and with out installing these new pipelines to take place of the older ones more and more are going to start leaking. So before you start crying how bad it is if the put it in start thinking about the good it’s going to do!
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
