With no fanfare and a 104-word letter to the Senate,
Mr. Obama vetoed legislation to authorize construction of a 1,179-mile
pipeline that would carry 800,000 barrels of heavy petroleum a day from
the oil sands of Alberta to ports and refineries on the Gulf Coast.
In
exercising the unique power of the Oval Office for only the third time
since his election in 2008, Mr. Obama accused lawmakers of seeking to
circumvent the administration’s approval process for the pipeline by
cutting short “consideration of issues that could bear on our national
interest.”
By
rejecting the legislation, Mr. Obama retains the right to make a final
judgment on the pipeline on his own timeline. But he did little to calm
the political debate over Keystone, which has become a symbol of the
continuing struggle between environmentalists and conservatives.
How Keystone XL Got (So) Political
As Washington debates Keystone XL, here’s how the 1,179-mile pipeline became so political.
Video by Carrie Halperin and Emily B. Hager on
Publish Date January 8, 2015.
Photo by Andrew Cullen/Reuters.
Backers of the pipeline denounced Mr. Obama’s actions and vowed to keep fighting for its construction.
The House speaker, John A. Boehner of Ohio, called the president’s veto “a national embarrassment” and accused Mr. Obama of being “too close to environmental extremists” and “too invested in left-fringe politics.”
Environmentalists
quickly hailed the decision, which they said clearly indicated Mr.
Obama’s intention to reject the pipeline’s construction. The White House
has said the president will decide whether to allow the pipeline when
all of the environmental reviews are completed in the coming weeks.
“Republicans
in Congress continued to waste everyone’s time with a bill destined to
go nowhere, just to satisfy the agenda of their big oil allies,” said
Michael Brune, the executive director of the Sierra Club. “The president
has all the evidence he needs to reject Keystone XL now, and we are
confident that he will.”
Since 2011, the proposed Keystone pipeline has emerged as a broader symbol of the partisan political clash over energy, climate change and the economy.
Most
energy policy experts say the project will have a minimal impact on
jobs and climate. But Republicans insist that the pipeline will increase
employment by linking the United States to an energy supply from a
friendly neighbor. Environmentalists say it will contribute to
ecological destruction and damaging climate change.
Mr. Obama has hinted that he thinks both sides have inflated their arguments, but he has not said what he will decide.
In his State of the Union address
last month, Mr. Obama urged lawmakers to move past the pipeline debate,
calling for passage of a comprehensive infrastructure plan. “Let’s set
our sights higher than a single oil pipeline,” he said.
Republican
leaders had promised to use the veto, which was expected, to denounce
Mr. Obama as a partisan obstructionist. They made good on that promise
minutes after the president’s veto message was read on the floor of the
Senate on Tuesday.
Continue reading the main story
Continue reading the main story
Continue reading the main story
“The
fact he vetoed the bipartisan Keystone Pipeline in private shows how
out of step he is with the priorities of the American people, who
overwhelmingly support this vital jobs and infrastructure project,”
Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, said
in a statement.
In
recent months, the environmental activists — who have spent years
marching, protesting and getting arrested outside the White House in
their quest to persuade Mr. Obama to reject the project — have said they
are increasingly optimistic that their efforts will succeed.
“Hopefully
the ongoing legislative charade has strengthened his commitment to do
the right thing,” said Bill McKibben, a founder of the group 350.org,
which has led the campaign to urge Mr. Obama to reject the pipeline.
The
debate began in 2008, when the TransCanada Corporation applied for a
permit to construct the pipeline. The State Department is required to
determine whether the pipeline is in the national interest, but the last
word on whether the project will go forward ultimately rests with the
president.
Mr.
Obama has delayed making that decision until all the legal and
environmental reviews of the process are completed. He has said a
critical factor in his decision will be whether the project contributes
to climate change.
Last year, an 11-volume environmental impact review by the State Department
concluded that oil extracted from the Canadian oil sands produced about
17 percent more carbon pollution than conventionally extracted oil.
But
the review said the pipeline was unlikely to contribute to a
significant increase in planet-warming greenhouse gases because the fuel
would probably be extracted from the oil sands and sold with or without
construction of the pipeline.
This month, environmentalists pointed to a letter from the Environmental Protection Agency that they said proved that the pipeline could add to greenhouse gases.
The
question of whether to build the pipeline comes as Mr. Obama hopes to
make climate change policy a cornerstone of his legacy. This summer, the
E.P.A. is expected to issue sweeping regulations to cut greenhouse gas
pollution from power plants, a move experts say would have vastly more
impact on the nation’s carbon footprint than construction of the
Keystone pipeline.
In
December, world leaders hope to sign a global United Nations accord in
Paris that would commit every nation in the world to enacting plans to
reduce its rates of planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions. In the
coming months, countries are expected to begin putting forward those
policies for cutting carbon emissions.
While
the Keystone pipeline is not expected to be part of the United States
climate change plan, a public presidential decision on the project could
be interpreted as a message about Mr. Obama’s symbolic commitment to
the issue of climate change.
Until
that decision is made, however, both sides of the Keystone fight are
stepping up their tactics. Environmental groups are planning more
marches and White House petitions, while Republicans in Congress are
looking for ways to bring the Keystone measure back to Mr. Obama’s desk.
Senator
John Hoeven, Republican of North Dakota, who sponsored the Keystone
bill, said he would consider adding language requiring construction of
the pipeline to other legislation, such as spending bills to fund
federal agencies, which could make a veto far more politically risky for
Mr. Obama.
A
final decision by the president could come soon. Last month, a court in
Nebraska reached a verdict in a case about the pipeline’s route through
the state, clearing the way for construction. And this month, final
reviews of the pipeline by eight federal agencies were completed.
However,
Mr. Obama is under no legal obligation to make a final decision, and
there is no official timetable for a decision. He could approve or deny
the project at any time — or leave the decision to the next president.
No comments:
Post a Comment