Obama spurns jobs

Jan. 23, 2012
Now the president must appease his labor constituency. In rejecting construction of an important pipeline, US President Barack Obama has foreclosed employment for thousands of workers and stalled if not killed a project hugely beneficial to energy security.

Now the president must appease his labor constituency. In rejecting construction of an important pipeline, US President Barack Obama has foreclosed employment for thousands of workers and stalled if not killed a project hugely beneficial to energy security. But he made environmentalists happy. He needs their political support.

“Today’s announcement delivers a well-deserved blow to a project that would shuttle dirty tar-sands oil through America’s heartland for export to the global market, and it defies political threats issued by Big Oil and its cronies in Congress,” declared Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen’s Energy Program in a statement typical of activist groups responding to the decision. Slocum disparaged the oil industry’s “paid campaign of lies about jobs and energy security.” Then he asserted the real motivation: “This is the president’s opportunity to start to end the tyranny of oil and start moving toward a new energy economy that protects the climate, creates jobs, and respects the health of our families.”

Campaign against oil

The campaign against Keystone XL is a campaign against oil. It’s a campaign of fear targeted at the majority of Americans who would not knowingly choose an energy future characterized by high cost and short supply, which is where the antoil agenda leads. In his campaign for reelection, though, Obama needs the antioil activists and their money.

But what’s he to do about the workers and their unions on whose concern for job creation he has just stomped? Blame Republicans—that’s what.

He’ll blame the opposition party in his State of the Union speech Jan. 24. The approach of that brightest of American spotlights surely influenced timing of his decision about Keystone XL, which wasn’t due until Feb. 21. His message is predictable.

The president will say he didn’t want to make a hasty decision about Keystone XL, for which TransCanada first sought approval in 2008. He’ll say his desire for information about alternative routes made him postpone a decision until after next November’s election. He’ll say Republicans forced his hand when they tacked a deadline for a pipeline decision onto a December bill temporarily extending payroll tax relief. He couldn’t be rushed. He just couldn’t.

The State Department announcement of the latest decision set all this up, citing the 60 days the payroll tax bill gave him to decide if Keystone XL is in the national interest and calling that “insufficient for such a determination.” So it’s the Republicans’ fault.

The Republicans did fumble this issue. They shouldn’t have used an important energy project in a political squeeze play. The gambit backfired, making them look foolish. Now the future of Keystone XL is in question, although the administration’s repeated emphasis on timing indicates the project’s not dead.

But who’s fooling whom? After 3 years of scrutiny, 60 days is plenty of time in which to determine the pipeline serves national interests. Or does the administration really want to side with the fringe and call overland access to a huge supply of economic energy from a friendly neighbor bad for Americans for the simple reason that the energy takes the form of oil? In an election year?

Whom to believe?

Here are some of the numbers Public Citizen called lies: 20,000 US workers associated with Keystone XL, including 13,000 related to construction and 7,000 in manufacturing. TransCanada published those estimates earlier this month, breaking construction numbers out by position title within each of 17 pipeline spreads. The oil sands development supported by the pipeline would create further employment in the US and Canada. TransCanada cited a study putting the US number at 465,000.

Americans can believe those estimates from a company that knows something about pipeline construction and is willing to back its position with a $7 billion investment. Or they can believe groups who want to frighten them away from ample and affordable energy and employment linked with resource development.

Obama has made his choice. Voters make theirs in November.

More Oil & Gas Journal Current Issue Articles
More Oil & Gas Journal Archives Issue Articles
View Oil and Gas Articles on PennEnergy.com