Hudson: We’re on an express elevator to hell; going down…

Today in west central Missouri:

The retail price of gasoline in west central Missouri in the afternoon, November 14, 2014.

Today, in the U.S. House of Representatives:

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 519

     H R 5682      RECORDED VOTE      14-Nov-2014      12:52 PM

     QUESTION:  On Passage

     BILL TITLE: To approve the Keystone XL Pipeline

—- AYES    252 —

Graves (MO)

Hartzler

Long

Luetkemeyer

Smith (MO)

Wagner

—- NOES    161 —

Clay

Cleaver

—- ANSWERED “PRESENT”    1 —

—- NOT VOTING    20 —

Voting in an effort to apply political pressure for the approval of a pipeline to transport corrosive Canadian tar sands across the United States to be refined in Texas for export to China benefits energy availability in the United States and carbon emissions in China (and the world) how?

It certainly won’t save Mary Landrieu’s seat in the United States Senate.

Previously:

Charles P. Pierce is meaner (November 14, 2014)

And then all hell broke loose (November 13, 2014)

We need the Keystone XL pipeline because? (November 13, 2014)

Darn that President Obama and his totally misguided national energy policy… (September 29, 2014)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r) – in Warrensburg – August 22, 2014 (August 23, 2014)

Sounds of silence (gasoline) (December 16, 2013)

What cost, you say? (November 15, 2013)

Still going down… (November 7, 2013)

It upsets right wingnuts… (November 4, 2013)

Thank goodness that Keystone pipeline is up and running (October 28, 2013)

We’re on an express elevator to…going down (October 14, 2013)

Water is wet (October 9, 2013)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): we don’t need no stinkin’ objective reality (January 21, 2012)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): not especially prescient (January 9, 2013)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): strange silence, still (December 19, 2012)

Quick, blame Obama! – part 3 – trickle down (December 8, 2012)

Quick, blame Obama! – part 2 (December 5, 2012)

Quick, blame Obama! (December 1, 2012)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): make it stop… (November 18, 2012)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): the price keeps dropping and we’re running out of gas puns (November 15, 2012)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): on an express elevator… (November 12, 2012)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): wait, wait, don’t tell me (November 8, 2012)

Vicky Hartzler (r): it’s so quiet when the price keeps dropping (October 31, 2012)

Vicky Hartzler (r): What’s that? Did you say something? Apparently not. (October 29, 2012)

Vicky Hartzler (r): the sound of silence (October 23, 2012)

The past, the gas, and isms (September 24, 2012)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): let’s pass the gas – part 2 (June 6, 2012)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): let’s pass the gas (May 27, 2012)

….FDR once met with a group of activists who sought his support for legislation. He listened to their arguments for some time and then said, “You’ve convinced me. Now go out and make me do it….”

Or, “make me not do it.”

Yesterday in Esquire:

More Mush From The Wimps

By Charles P. Pierce on November 13, 2014

….But McCaskill has proven herself to be a genuinely Liebermanesque menace. She’s the one that needs watching when the tough votes come up next year. I think she’d sell the party for parts in exchange for three points in the next Gallup Poll of Missouri….

That was cold, man, really cold.

Previously:

We need the Keystone XL pipeline because? (November 13, 2014)

And then all hell broke loose (November 13, 2014)

Today, in west central Missouri:

The retail price of gasoline in west central Missouri the morning of November 13, 2014.

And the Democrats in the U.S. Senate want a vote to approve the Keystone pipeline so as to “save” the seat of Senator Mary Landrieu (which is beyond saving) in the upcoming runoff election? Right.

Give the store away to the opposition in the name of “moderation” by unlocking the door, pointing out the really valuable stock, loading the truck for them, and waving as they drive away. Yeah, that’ll motivate your base.

Previously:

Darn that President Obama and his totally misguided national energy policy… (September 29, 2014)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r) – in Warrensburg – August 22, 2014 (August 23, 2014)

Sounds of silence (gasoline) (December 16, 2013)

What cost, you say? (November 15, 2013)

Still going down… (November 7, 2013)

It upsets right wingnuts… (November 4, 2013)

Thank goodness that Keystone pipeline is up and running (October 28, 2013)

We’re on an express elevator to…going down (October 14, 2013)

Water is wet (October 9, 2013)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): we don’t need no stinkin’ objective reality (January 21, 2012)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): not especially prescient (January 9, 2013)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): strange silence, still (December 19, 2012)

Quick, blame Obama! – part 3 – trickle down (December 8, 2012)

Quick, blame Obama! – part 2 (December 5, 2012)

Quick, blame Obama! (December 1, 2012)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): make it stop… (November 18, 2012)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): the price keeps dropping and we’re running out of gas puns (November 15, 2012)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): on an express elevator… (November 12, 2012)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): wait, wait, don’t tell me (November 8, 2012)

Vicky Hartzler (r): it’s so quiet when the price keeps dropping (October 31, 2012)

Vicky Hartzler (r): What’s that? Did you say something? Apparently not. (October 29, 2012)

Vicky Hartzler (r): the sound of silence (October 23, 2012)

The past, the gas, and isms (September 24, 2012)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): let’s pass the gas – part 2 (June 6, 2012)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): let’s pass the gas (May 27, 2012)

The Keystone Pipeline would cross the central United States carrying environmentally “dirty” tar sands oil to refineries on the Gulf. Environmentalists oppose it on numerous grounds. Those who support it it usually do so on the grounds that it would create jobs in the U.S. and would lessen our energy dependence on the Middle East. Both claims have been convincingly disputed. The jobs claim, however, has been a constant talking point among Missouri’s Republican delegation to Washington D.C.:

I wrote last week that Rep. Ann Wagner (R-4) was getting all worked up that the president had had the gall to call Republicans out on the topic of the economy while delaying approval of the Keystone XL pipeline.

Right now, President Obama can approve the Keystone XL pipeline and create tens of thousands of good-paying jobs while ushering in a new era of energy independence.

GOP Senator Roy Blunt also thinks Keystone XL is a great idea according to a press release on his Website:

Blunt cosponsored bipartisan legislation – which was introduced by U.S. Senator John Hoeven (N.D.) and is cosponsored by 44 Senators – to authorize the construction and operation of the Keystone XL Pipeline. The Keystone XL Pipeline would create an estimated 20,000 jobs.

Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-3) claims that if the President endorses the pipeline, “the end result will be the creation of 20,000 jobs and the reduction of our dependence on foreign oil.”

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-4) also likes that 20,000 number, claiming on her Website, that “TransCanada, the builder of the pipeline, plans to spend  $7 billion in the U.S. and create 20,000 jobs.”

Ever the team player, Rep. Billy Long (R-7) goes along with the idea that it’s all about jobs, claiming that “the Keystone pipeline is a privately funded jobs project.” Imagine! I bet TransCanada thinks it’s significantly more that a “jobs project” when it comes to their bottom line.

On the other hand we have President Obama who recently indicated the criteria he would use to judge whether or not to okay the pipeline project. In his statement, he discounted the jobs argument that has become an article of faith among his Republican detractors, who were moved to near hysterical levels of invective when he delayed his decision on the pipeline last year. Instead, the President observed that:

“Republicans have said that this would be a big jobs generator,” Obama told the Times. “There is no evidence that that’s true. The most realistic estimates are this might create maybe 2,000 jobs during the construction of the pipeline, which might take a year or two, and then after that we’re talking about somewhere between 50 and 100 jobs in an economy of 150 million working people.”

On one side: right-wing, free-market ideologues, many of whom are in hock to the energy industries that fund their campaign with big donations. On the other side: a famously cautious, centrist politician with nothing to gain from Big Oil who has taken the time to review all the arguments – and who has no ideologically implanted hostility to environmentalism baked into his genetic makeup.

The real indication that something is amiss with the GOP job estimates, however, is a fact that our pols ought to be aware of. The company that wants to build the pipeline, TransCanada itself, has been backing off the earlier estimates of large numbers of jobs:

In January of 2010, Trans-Canada CEO Russell Girling claimed that the project would produce 13,000 construction jobs.  In April of 2011 the number grew to 20,000, which the Canadian Ambassador reiterated in August 2011.  In January 2012 the number was revised back down to 13,000 and this past April the company revised that number even lower, to 9,000 construction jobs.

Nine thousand jobs are still more than the estimates prepared by the State Department and those offered in another study done by Cornell University, but it’s getting closer and closer to the ball park in which opponents of the pipeline have been playing. This fact alone suggests that our Republicans should be worried that they’re promising lots more than TransCanada can deliver.

ADDENDA:  TransCanada is sending mixed messages, apparently backtracking again to the 20,000 jobs figure – at least for public consumption – and claiming disingenuously that “there is no reason for us to overinflate our numbers, we have to answer to our board, we have to answer to our shareholders.”  The 9,000 number comes as noted above from the TransCanada CEO, Russell Girling in April of this year; the reiteration of the 20,000 number comes from a company “spokesperson,” one James Miller apropos the “political” situation that he posits as the rationale behind the President’s comments. Draw your own conclusions.  

No big surprise that Roy Blunt does his best to pay off his Big Oil patrons. Alternet’s Tara Lohan didn’t characterize him as “Exon’s man”  for no reason after all.

Yesterday he voted against the Buffett Rule. No big surprise there either. What’s the connection? Check out what Blunt had to say on his Facebook page about his Buffett Rule vote (and try not to laugh out loud):

I voted against the Buffett Tax today because it would do nothing to jumpstart job creation or lower gas prices – a fact my colleagues across the aisle readily admit. Americans are struggling with high unemployment and skyrocketing fuel costs, and the last thing job creators need is greater uncertainty. We must work together to pass bipartisan solutions like the Keystone XL Pipeline and a pro-growth tax structure that will encourage businesses to invest and hire more workers.

Tell me again what tax fairness has to do with gas prices – or Keystone XL? Apart from the big tax subsidies with which we the taxpayers gift the oil companies – thanks to GOP pols like our Senator Blunt – most of us, I’m pretty sure, would say not too much. Unless, of course, like Roy, you’ve been working double-time to use higher gas prices to club the opposition while drumming up support for letting the oil companies run wild and free.

Given that Blunt’s so worried about gas prices that have nearly reached levels that last prevailed under his pal George W. Bush, he will surely be pleased to support the President’s latest initiative to deal with factors that actually affect prices – and no, they have nothing to do with the Buffett Rule:

With average gasoline prices at $3.90 nationwide and higher in various regions, the Obama administration will announce this morning new measures to boost federal oversight of oil markets, tougher penalties on market manipulation and requirements for empower energy traders to put more money behind to back their commodity transactions.

You’re correct, of course, that I shouldn’t hold my breath waiting for Blunt’s endorsement. We all know that while he’ll come out swinging in defense of the big guys who, incidentally, richly finance his political campaigns, he’s no more interested in asking oil company execs and financial types to do their part and act responsibly than he is in taking a stand for tax fairness.

* Last paragraph slightly edited for clarity.

Yesterday, GOP Senator Roy Blunt’s office sent out a press release touting his co-sponsorhip of legislation that would permit congress to authorize the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline:

This project would create 20,000 American jobs, generate $20.9 billion in new private sector spending, reinforce America’s energy security, and benefit 1,400 American job creators – all without costing taxpayers a dime,” Blunt concluded. “This project is good for America’s job creation and energy independence, and that’s why I’m proud to join my colleagues to co-sponsor this bill.

As is often the case with the esteemed Senator Blunt, the statement above is replete with misstatements and exaggerations:

— Unbiased studies put the number of jobs that XL Keystone would create at 6,000 temporary jobs tops, and some estimates are as low as 2,000 – or even that the project will kill more jobs than it will create.

— The U.S. is now a net exporter of products made from crude oil; any oil piped to the Gulf along Keystone would be sold to the highest bidder, countries like Mexico and China. Consequently, completion of the pipeline has little to do with energy independence.

So why is Blunt overstating the benefits?  There are two likely reasons:

1. Political gamesmanship:  Congressional Republicans are, as TPM’s Sahil Kapur argues, trying to exploit Democratic divisions and push Obama into a corner politically:

… It’s a question of whether we’d rather have the pipeline or the issue,” a GOP aide said in December. They chose the issue, bringing into question how much they care about the pipeline itself. Indeed, not forcing a decision would have neutralized the politics surrounding the matter.

But now Republicans have turned it into a weapon, and the politics are win-win for them. Their base overwhelmingly supports the pipeline and its capacity for some temporary job creation puts them on the right side of the most important issue on voters’ minds in this election year.

For Democrats, the issue is a headache because their constituencies are split: environmentalists oppose it, while labor and big business have forged an unlikely alliance in its favor. The GOP push may not yield anything substantive, but it forces Obama to keep taking sides within his base, and answer to Republican attacks that he’s blocking a job creation opportunity.

2. Money. When the senator in question is Roy Blunt, money always seems to enter the equation somewhere down the line.  As Think Progress reports, senators who have supported Keystone XL have been well paid by PACs representing Big Oil. Of the 35 senators listed by Think Progress,  Senator Blunt, as befits a new member of the senate leadership, has done very well for himself, having received $39,000, the third largest contribution.

Once again we are about to see corruption and political games trump reasoned and careful policy making. And, once again Roy Blunt’s right in the middle of it all. If you’re nostalgic for the Good Old Days in the Bush administration, it seems like your time has come again – if it ever went away, a proposition that may have been put to the lie by the election of Roy Blunt to the Senate.