Discussion for article #232521
Wow I have to admit I’m really surprised by this and glad to see it. I figured many Democrats would cave. And they will probably vote in favor of Keystone. But I’m glad to see them taking a stand against McConnell’s phony and dishonest claims to an “open amendment process.”
4 Likes
Praise the Lord!
We have absolutely no need to this new pipeline. With oil prices so low, t will be bankrupt (with we taxpayers left holding the debt) before the pipeline could even be completed.
2 Likes
With a vote of 53-39 it appears a few Republicans also stalled progress on the vote.
2 Likes
This isn’t payback to the do-nothing obstructionist Republicans, this is the blocking of a bad bill and terrible idea by any means necessary.
Its only the future of our planet that’s at stake.
3 Likes
If there is a market, the oil will flow. If a pipeline isn’t built through your city, will it go on a train through mine? It’s worth asking, and these are the questions the state department and administration are considering, by actually studying the problem.
When congress ask the president to take action without thought, and without real review, then they must be stopped.
In short, I will support the president if he decides to allow the pipeline, after careful thought and review. I will not support anyone who does this without thought.
Did you know that Wisconsin has a refinery? The Murphy Oil refinery in Superior, WI has been processing Canadian oil for decades, supplied by the Enbridge pipeline. Naturally, Rep Sean Duffy (R-WI) supports the Keystone XL expansion, which bypasses the refinery in his own district completely. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) supports it too, as does Gov. Walker. Sen Baldwin (D-WI) opposed it, which couldn’t make it much clearer who really represents whom.
It takes times to do things in the Senate. It is a bit silly if perhaps technically true that this was a “filibuster.” I think more than a few weeks of session is required before that is appropriate. It does show how procedural moves can delay. I guess some minimum debate might be required w/o the sixty votes. This is proper for major legislation. If this is blocked for months w/o any up/down vote, we can talk about a true “filibuster” happening.
Since the destruction to the aquifer would be a major calamity, why are folks who don’t live where it goes allowed to get a say? I’m serious. Less than 50 permanent jobs for most likely destruction makes no sense at all. Repubs would sell their mothers and children for the almighty dollar.
As long as it stops the pipeline, I’m good with whatever works.
They “get a say” the same way other things that affect lots of people – representatives of the people in Congress vote on it & the President either signs it or vetoes it.