Topic: US House Links Payroll Tax Extension to Keystone Pipeline

[tomahawk6]

Its a solid strategy by the republicans.The pipeline would put 20,000 mostly union workers to work. Whereas the payroll tax extension helps those with a job. The bonus is that once the oil flows it will lessen our dependence on arab oil.

[cupper]

Its a solid strategy by the republicans.The pipeline would put 20,000 mostly union workers to work. Whereas the payroll tax extension helps those with a job. The bonus is that once the oil flows it will lessen our dependence on arab oil.

Much as I disagree with the Republican strategies over the past 4 years, the whole Keystone issue should have been a done deal. It makes sense from an economic and strategic point of view. Eventually they will need to bring oil down from Alaska in a more convenient way than by Tanker, so it just makes sense to have the line now, and tie into it when the time comes.

[ModlrMike]

If you look at the proposed pipeline route to Texas, it flows through predominantly red states. Surely there's no political component to this? 

[cupper]

If you look at the proposed pipeline route to Texas, it flows through predominantly red states. Surely there's no political component to this? 

Noooooo. Not at all. Since when has any political consideration been involved in planning major projects that could deliver $billions in goods and services contracts and jobs.

Can't think of any examples. None.

[tomahawk6]

Red states have always been friendly to the construction of oil refineries. It doesnt make much sense to take Canadian oil to either coast,they would never get a permit for construction.One day oil/gas from Alaska will get piped through Canada to the US.

[tomahawk6]

The House passed the bill. Lets see what the Senate does with it. Anyone against jobs ?

http://news.yahoo.com/republicans-muscle-tax-cut-bill-house-235144990.html

WASHINGTON (AP) — Defiant Republicans pushed legislation through the House Tuesday night that would keep alive Social Security payroll tax cuts for some 160 million Americans at President Barack Obama's request — but also would require construction of a Canada-to-Texas oil pipeline that has sparked a White House veto threat.

Passage, on a largely party-line vote of 234-193, sent the measure toward its certain demise in the Democratic-controlled Senate, triggering the final partisan showdown of a remarkably quarrelsome year of divided government.

The legislation "extends the payroll tax relief, extends and reforms unemployment insurance and protects Social Security — without job-killing tax hikes," Republican House Speaker John Boehner declared after the measure had cleared.

Referring to the controversy over the Keystone XL pipeline, he added, "Our bill includes sensible, bipartisan measures to help the private sector create jobs."

On a long day of finger pointing, however, House Democrats accused Republicans of protecting "millionaires and billionaires, " and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., derided the GOP-backed pipeline provision as "ideological candy" for the tea party-set.

After the House vote, the White House urged Congress on in finishing work on extending the tax cuts and jobless aid. Press Secretary Jay Carney issued a statement that didn't mention the pipeline but renewed Obama's insistence that the legislation be paid for, at least in part, by "asking the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share" in higher tax levies.

Lawmakers "cannot go on vacation before agreeing to prevent a tax hike on 160 million Americans and extending unemployment insurance," he said.

Republicans mocked Obama's objections to their version of the bill.

"Mr. President, we can't wait," said House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia, employing a refrain the White House often uses to criticize Republicans for failing to take steps to improve an economy struggling to recover from the worst recession in decades.

Voting in favor of the legislation were 224 Republicans and 10 Democrats, while 179 Democrats and 14 Republicans opposed it.

At its core, the measure did include key parts of the jobs program that Obama asked Congress to approve in September.

The Social Security payroll tax cuts approved a year ago to help stimulate the economy would be extended through 2012, avoiding a loss of take-home income for wage-earners. An expiring program of unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless would remain in place, although at reduced levels that the administration said would cut off aid for 3.3 million.

A third major component would avert a threatened 27 percent cut in payments to doctors who treat Medicare patients, a provision Republicans added to appeal to conservatives but one that the White House and Democrats embrace, too.

While the tax and unemployment provisions were less generous than Obama sought, he and Republicans clashed principally over steps to cover the estimated $180 billion cost of the measure, and on the proposed 1,700-mile Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada through environmentally sensitive terrain in Nebraska to the Texas Gulf Coast.

Obama recently delayed a decision on granting a permit for the pipeline until after the 2012 election.

The payroll tax legislation was one of three major bills that Congress was struggling to finish before adjourning for the year, and by far the most contentious.

A measure covering Pentagon spending was ready for passage, and, separately, negotiators said they were close to a deal on a $1 trillion measure to fund most government agencies through the end of the budget year.

That deal was in limbo, though, with Obama and congressional Democrats using it as leverage to keep House Republicans at the table negotiating a final compromise on the tax and unemployment measure.

It was the final showdown of a year that once brought the government to the brink of a shutdown and also pushed the Treasury to the cusp of a first-ever default.

Those confrontations produced last-minute compromises.

This time, leaders in both parties stressed a desire to renew the unemployment tax cuts and jobless benefits that are at the core of Obama's jobs program.

Obama and most Democrats favor an income surtax on million-dollar earners to pay for extending the Social Security tax cut, but Republicans oppose that, saying it is a violation of their pledge not to raise taxes.

Instead, the House bill called for a one-year pay freeze and higher pension costs for federal workers, higher Medicare costs for seniors over $80,000 in income as well as other items to cover the cost.

Obama's veto message focused on economic issues — which unite Democrats — accusing Republicans of putting the burden of paying for the legislation on working families "while giving a free pass to the wealthiest and to big corporations by protecting their loopholes and subsidies."

Republicans drew attention at every turn to the pipeline, which is backed by some lawmakers in the president's party as well as by the blue-collar unions representing plumbers, pipefitters, electricians, carpenters and construction workers.

Estimates of the jobs that would be produced by pipeline construction vary widely but are in the thousands in a time of high national unemployment. The State Department estimated the total at about 6,000; project manager TransCanada put it at 20,000 directly, and Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., said in debate on the House floor it was more than 100,000.

Democrats aimed their criticism at the bill's impact on those who would bear the cost.

Rep. Sander Levin of Michigan, the party's senior lawmaker on the Ways and Means Committee, displayed a placard that said "Seniors sacrifice: $31 billion. Federal workers sacrifice: $40 billion. Unemployed Americans sacrifice: $11 billion. Millionaires and billionaires sacrifice: $0."

The bill also "spends $300 million on a special interest provision that helps a handful of specialty hospitals while cutting billions from community hospitals," he said, referring to a part of the measure that will raise federal Medicare payments to doctor-owned hospitals.

Rep. Eliot Engel, a New York Democrat, said he had an open mind about the pipeline but also said it had no legitimate role in the payroll tax bill.

Republicans argued otherwise.

Rep. Fred Upton of Michigan, the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said the pipeline's construction would allow Canada to send one million barrels of oil a day into the United States, lessening domestic reliance on imports.

He said Canadian development of a pipeline is a certainty, and lawmakers needed to decide whether they wanted it to end up in the United States or "someplace like China."

As drafted by Republicans, the measure also would block the Environmental Protection Agency from issuing planned rules to limit toxic emissions from industrial boilers. Republicans said the regulation would be a job killer, and 41 Democrats supported an earlier stand-alone measure to prevent the administration from acting.

Other provisions to cover the cost of the legislation would repeal billions from the health care bill that Obama won from Congress last year when both the House and Senate were under Democratic control and from boosting fees that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac charge banks for backing their mortgages.

[cupper]

I am. If you want mine, you can have it.

[Robert0288]

In an interview earlier this month obama said he would veto if the republicans linked the payroll tax extension to keystone, and the republicans just put him between a rock and cliff.  This all has to do with election money for him as there are too many special interest democrat/lefty donor groups opposed to keystone who will deny funds if it passes.  Also well as the payroll tax is his party's baby from what I remeber.  He's basically screwed if he does, screwed if he doesn't.  Although if this same vote came up after the next election, either party would have instantly agreed to keystone.

Conclusion, american politics is %!@# beyond all belief

[Brad Sallows]

The bill has to pass the Senate first, and the Democrat majority there has shown itself willing to protect Obama in the past.

[tomahawk6]

Its an upcoming election year and creating jobs no matter your party should be a no brainer. Supporting energy security for the country is or should be a national security issue.Its a win win IF you are on the correct side of this issue.

[Colin P]

The cracks are appearing in the First Nation front against the Endbridge proposal to build an oil terminal in Kitimat. The final decision to build will be a political one based on feedback from the reviewing Panel. I am pretty sure what the political choice is going to be. The US has taken for granted first choice access to our resources, once the the oil terminal is built and at least 1 of the 3 LNG terminal in the same area is built, the US will have to compete with the rest of the world for our oil and gas.
That's not to say piping to connect to the existing transmissions line to the south won't happen, which I know it is currently happening.

[cupper]

Its an upcoming election year and creating jobs no matter your party should be a no brainer. Supporting energy security for the country is or should be a national security issue.Its a win win IF you are on the correct side of this issue.

It would be a no brainer, but unfortunately when the pols have no brain, this is the result.

[Robert0288]

Jobs to generic working people do not bring in large amounts of money from the special interest groups or commy-fornia.  If it creates 20k jobs anywhere in the US, 45% are already voting for the democrats, the other 45% republicans, leaving 2k swing voters to nab from those directly effected.  Now since the pipeline runs through red states its more likely 55-60 vs 30-35 making your vote gain almost nothing.  Now if somone throws up 1-10 million at you for opposing, you win the lefty vote nation wide as well as 10million to influence any swing state you need.

Reelection money and votes just beat giving 20,000 people meaningful jobs boosting the economy and ensuring energy security.... Atleast until the election is over, then it doesn't matter for another 2 after that.

[tomahawk6]

Looks like the Senate will join with the House to give the go ahead for the Keystone Pipeline.Nothing final yet but its looking good. The deal is as follows.

What [it] basically does is require the State Department to issue the permit for Keystone XL within 60 days, unless President Obama explicitly says the pipeline is not in the national interest and kills it (that would definitely not be good for him to do).

It also tells State to allow construction to go ahead while it works with Nebraska to resolve any remaining environmental or routing issues. The governor and legislature there are on board with getting a new route to allay any concerns.

So we got the Keystone language, Dems got a 2 month extension of their payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance, but the cost is fully offset (with spending cuts) so it doesn’t add to the deficit.

Payroll tax break for 2 months
Keystone Pipeline authorized
No tax hikes
Fully paid for in other cuts

[ModlrMike]

I think this puts Mr Obama in a very difficult position: he vetos it and kills thousands of jobs, or he approves it and alienates the radical left. Either way he looks bad.

[tomahawk6]

Don't worry this President wont have any trouble claiming credit for job creation.

[cupper]

Looks like the Senate will join with the House to give the go ahead for the Keystone Pipeline.Nothing final yet but its looking good. The deal is as follows.

Payroll tax break for 2 months
Keystone Pipeline authorized
No tax hikes
Fully paid for in other cuts

Don't count your chickens before they come home to roost.

Wait until the signing statement which says that extends the State Dept. review process back to the original 2013 date.

[recceguy]

Don't count your chickens before they come home to roost.

Wait until the signing statement which says that extends the State Dept. review process back to the original 2013 date.

Pigeons.

Pigeons come home to roost.

Chickens, like the current Administration, never leave the safety of the known entity (the coop).

They won't stick out their neck and will stay where they believe they are safe and protected.

[cupper]

Pigeons.

Pigeons come home to roost.

Chickens, like the current Administration, never leave the safety of the known entity (the coop).

They won't stick out their neck and will stay where they believe they are safe and protected.

Actually, I always thought it was Cows that came home to roost.

[Nemo888]

No offense to our American allies, but if we had a brain in our heads we would build a refinery in Canada and sell Americans fractionated product instead of crude. Currently we ship it to the states and then buy fractionated product from them. Personally I prefer Canada to be the profit maker on our natural resources. We could create most of the permanent jobs in Canada. The stats on how many jobs it will create are for the most part pulled out of thin air by lobbying firms on both sides. They are at best guesses. One side has been claiming 250,000 jobs created. The low number for permanent jobs for the pipeline is 20 by the State Department. I put permanent jobs at about 350. Its not like this pipeline will increase petroleum use so it is neutral in most respects except that petro execs think they can save money on shipping costs. The created jobs will be offset by the lost  jobs for workers on tankers who move that oil now. The construction is basically a stimulus package for the states it is going through with maybe 4000-6000 construction jobs max depending on how fast you want it constructed. This is not really a big deal for a country with over 3000,000,000 people.

[Rifleman62]

Yes it would be nice to build a refinery in Canada, but nobody wants it in their neighborhood. I believe, up to a year or so ago, Edmonton was a location where a refinery was planned. It costs billions, and billions to build a refinery to the environmental/safety standards of today and the future. It would be great if the government encouraged the build.

Then we have the environment lobby, financed by US interests that are opposed. Plus the media, liberals/NDP.

In the US they have lots of refineries (visit Houston), import oil to refine, stop a pipeline that will create employment now and in the future.
Canada we have few refineries (Shell Montreal now a terminal ), lots of oil, with no will to build refineries to create employment now/future.

Some here explained the problem re building a refinery.

[GAP]

It's a question of resources. The same companies that already have refineries in the US are likely the same ones that would build and finance one in Canada.
Their attitude is "If it's not broke, don't fix it. "

[Rifleman62]

The 20's something member of the Security Sqn at the entrance of Fort Sam Houston, examined our passports ID on Wednesday, and said, Canada. Did you bring the pipeline? Then said ridiculous. Being in Texas, I assumed he meant the Obama policy.

Their attitude is "If it's not broke, don't fix it. "

That's why I said: It would be great if the government encouraged the build.

[GAP]

That's why I said: It would be great if the government encouraged the build.

That would simply translate into  billions of taxpayers $$. It has to be commercially viable on its' own merits.

[Scott]

We already have enough of a legacy of defunct, dream and total nightmare refineries in Canada. That's why I agree with GAP's comment: it has to be able to fly on its own.