Keystone XL Pipeline

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, along with Senator Joe Manchin--and
actually a total of 60 sponsors--I have filed S. 1, which is the
Keystone approval bill. It is a very simple, straightforward bill. This
is legislation we have seen before in this body. What it does, under
the commerce clause of the Constitution, is authorize Congress to
approve the Keystone XL Pipeline project.

I have this map in the Chamber to show you the project. It runs from
Hardisty in Alberta, Canada, all the way down to our refineries in
Texas along the gulf coast.

This project will move 830,000 barrels of oil a day. Some of that
will be oil from Canada. Some of that will be domestic oil from the
Bakken region in Montana and North Dakota.

This is part of building the infrastructure so we can build a
comprehensive energy plan for our country. We are producing more and
more oil and gas in our country from shale from places such as the
Bakken in North Dakota and Montana, the Eagle Ford in Texas, natural
gas from places such as the Barnett and the Marcellus in New York,
Pennsylvania, and Ohio.

What we are working toward is--some people refer to it as energy
independence, but really energy security for our country.

What does that mean? It means we produce more energy than we consume.

Obviously, energy has a global market. The market for energy is a
global market. We know that. The market for oil and gas is a global
market.

But the point is, working together with our closest friend and ally,
Canada, we can have North American energy security where we produce
more energy than we consume.

Why is that important? That is important because it is about creating
jobs. It is important because it is about economic growth. It is
important because it is a national security issue.

Why do we continue to rely on oil from the Middle East? Why are we
continuing to send dollars to the Middle East where you have--look at
what happened in Paris today with an attack by Islamic extremists. One
of the ways we fight back, one of the ways we push back is we take
control of our own energy destiny. We can do it. We are doing it. Why
are gas prices lower today at the pump? Is it because OPEC decided to
give us a Christmas present? I do not think so. It is because we are
producing far more energy than we ever have before. But to continue to
produce that energy, we have to have the infrastructure to move that
energy from where it is produced to were it is consumed. That means
pipelines. That means roads. That means rail. For electricity, that
means transmission. But we cannot have an energy plan for this country
that really works without the infrastructure to move that energy safely
and effectively. That is what this project is all about.

So why are we here talking about it today? It seems like a pretty
straightforward proposition. After all, I think there are something
like 19 different pipelines that cross the border. In fact, there are
millions of miles of pipelines in this country. Here is a map I have in
the Chamber of just some of them. We have millions of miles of pipeline
in this country. A lot of them, as you can see, cross the border.

So why are we standing here today talking about another pipeline
project? Because for the past 6 years--for the past 6 years--the
administration has held this project up. They keep saying: There is a
process. As a matter of fact, Josh Earnest, just yesterday, said: Oh,
we have a process. Congress should not intervene in the Keystone XL
Pipeline approval issue because there is a process. Really, Mr.
President, there is a process? Let's see. The TransCanada company filed
application to build the Keystone XL Pipeline in September of 2008--
September 2008. If you do the math, that is more than 6 years ago. And
there is a process somehow to get to a conclusion?

So that company, which has invested hundreds of millions already,
wants to build, ultimately, an $8.9 million project that will move
830,000 barrels of oil a day. And here they are 6 years later still
waiting for approval. That is why today we are asking Congress to step
forward and do what the American people want.

Keystone is not a new issue. The American people understand this
issue. Poll after poll shows the American people, by a margin of about
70 percent to 20-some percent, support this project. Whom do we work
for? We work for the people of this great country, and 70 percent of
the people of this great country say: Approve the project. After 6 long
years, where all of the requirements have been met, approve the
project.

But the President, of course, continues to hold it up, and even
yesterday issued a veto threat. Why? Why is he wanting to threaten a
veto on a project that 70 percent of the American people support? It is
really hard to understand, isn't it? Because every time an objection
comes up, we have worked to address that objection.

When there was an objection on the route, the company rerouted. So
the President says: Well, it is an environmental concern. He says:
Well, it is an environmental concern. Really? An environmental concern?

This is what his own study found. After 6 years of study, the State
Department, in multiple environmental impact statements--three draft
statements and two final environmental impact statements--this is what
they found: no significant environmental impact, according to the U.S.
State Department environmental impact statements.

That is not something I did. That is not something the company did.
That is something the Obama administration did--repeatedly--and came to
the same conclusion: no significant environmental impact. In fact, if
you do not build the pipeline, you have to move that oil with 1,400
railcars a day.

Now, Canada is going to produce the energy. North Dakota, Montana,
other States, are going to continue to produce the energy. So that
energy is going to move. The question is, how and where? If we cannot
build the pipeline, then it has to go by railcar. So do we really want
1,400 railcars a day moving that product around or do we want it to
move more safely, more cost-effectively, with better environmental
stewardship through a pipeline? Common sense.

Then there is this idea somehow: Well, Canada is not going to produce
that oil if they do not have a pipeline. Wrong. They will move it by
rail, and they will build other pipelines. Here are several that are
already in the planning stages, as shown on this map. They will move it
to the East Coast to refineries they have there or they will send it
west and it will go to China.

Now, does that make sense? It does not make sense to the American
public, which is why the American public wants to work with Canada as
well as produce energy in our country to become energy secure. The idea
that we would say no to our closest friend and ally, Canada: We are not
going to work with you, we are going to continue to buy oil from the
Middle East, and we are going to have you send your oil to China, makes
no sense to the American people. And it should not. It should not. That
is why they overwhelmingly support this project.

So here we are. We are starting the new Congress. I think, very
clearly, in the last election, the people said: We support this
project. You saw it time after time with candidate after candidate who
supported this project who won their election. But on an even bigger
issue, an even bigger message, the people of this great country said:
We want the Congress to work together in a bipartisan way to get things
done. We want the Congress to work together in a bipartisan way to get things done.

So here we have legislation that has passed the House repeatedly with
a bipartisan majority. Here we have legislation that has bipartisan
support in this body. Here we have legislation that the American people
overwhelmingly support, after clearly giving the message in the last
election that they want us working together to get work done, and the
President issues a veto message right out of the gates. Why? For whom?
Whom is he working for?

So it is incumbent upon us to work together in a bipartisan way to
get this legislation passed. The way we are approaching it--and I see
my good friend and colleague from the great State of West Virginia is
here. I want to thank him and turn to him, but I want to do it in the
form of a question.

It was my very clear sense from the last election--and I think the
very clear sense that we all got from the last election--that they want
to see Congress working together in a bipartisan way, in an open
process to get the important work of this country done.

So with this legislation, it is not just that it is about important
energy infrastructure. It is also that we want to return to regular
order in this body, offer an open amendment process, allow people to
bring forward their amendments, offer those amendments, debate them,
and get a vote on those amendments. If they have amendments that can
add to and improve this legislation, great, let's have that process.
Let's have that debate. Let's have those votes. Let's make this bill as
good as we can possibly make it. Then the President needs to work with
us. The President needs to meet us halfway and get this done for the
American people.

So I would like to turn to my good colleague from the great State of
West Virginia and say: Aren't we doing all we can here to try to make
sure we are approaching this in a bipartisan way with an open,
transparent process to try to build support for this legislation?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I would like to thank the Senator from
West Virginia not only for his support on this project but for his
willingness to work hard, to work together to find bipartisan
solutions, whether it is this legislation or other legislation. That is
what it is incumbent upon us to do. It is not easy, but we have to be
willing to engage in the hard work it takes to get to this legislation,
to get these solutions in place for the American people.

I again thank the Senator for his leadership. I look forward to
continuing to work with the Senator and our colleagues on both sides of
the aisle to come to good solutions. That is what this effort is all
about.

I want to turn to the Senator from the State of Montana. The pipeline
project goes right through his State. Here is somebody who has dealt
with the issue on the House side of Congress and who has the project in
his home State. So he is talking on behalf of people where the pipeline
is right there.

I would like to turn to him and ask: What are the people in Montana
saying? It is fine for somebody far removed from a project to say I am
OK or I am not OK with it, but how about the people who are right there
on the site? They are directly affected. Tell us what is the sense in
the Senator's home State? What is the Senator hearing when he talks to
people?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOEVEN. I would like to thank the Senator from Montana again. We
are hearing from somebody who is there, who is talking to people, where
this project is going to be located, one of the States it would pass
through. I thank the Senator for his perspective and for his hard work
and commend him for being here and for his continued efforts not only
to work with our caucus but to reach out to the Democratic caucus as
well and find common ground on this important issue--something the
Senator from West Virginia said a minute ago; that is, let's focus on
the facts. I think the more understanding we create as to what the
facts are, the more this gets done on the merits.

I turn to the Senator from Wyoming--somebody who has long experience
with energy, somebody who comes from an energy State, a State that
produces a variety of sources of energy, and pose the same question to
him. In terms of focusing on the facts, whether it is the environmental
aspect, whether it is the jobs, whether it is making our country energy
secure, talk to us a little bit about the importance of this kind of
vital infrastructure--projects such as Keystone--for our country.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOEVEN. I thank the Senator from Wyoming for his comments today
and for his continued hard work in support of the issue. I look forward
to working with him again to get this done for the American people.

I turn to our leader on the energy committee, the chairman of the
energy committee, the Senator from Alaska, who understands energy. She
is from another State that produces a huge amount of energy for this
country, wants to produce more, and can produce more but only with the
infrastructure to do it. Isn't that what we are talking about here
today? This country can have more jobs, more economic growth, and more
energy that we produce right here at home. But, Senator, don't we need
the infrastructure to move that energy as safely and as cost-
effectively as possible?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Alaska for her
leadership on the Energy Committee and also for her willingness to work
in an open way on these important issues.

Across this body, on both sides of the aisle, there should be a deep
appreciation for her willingness to bring these bills forward so we can
debate them and we can offer amendments and we can build the kind of
energy future for this country our people so very much want to have.

The Senator from Alaska is somebody who lives and breathes this topic
when we talk energy--somebody who is truly committed to it but truly
committed to an open dialogue on all types of energy, giving everybody
an opportunity to weigh in and build the best energy plan for our
country that we possibly can.

So I extend my thanks to her and also my appreciation, and likewise
say I look forward to working with her on this issue and on so many
important energy issues.

I wish to turn to my colleague from the State of North Dakota and ask
her for her perspective on why this project is so important for our
country and for the energy future of our country.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOEVEN. I want to thank my colleague from North Dakota for
speaking on the important points she made, and that is that the energy
we are producing in this country is helping consumers at the pump by
bringing down prices.

I want to turn to my colleague from Kansas who wants to close this
colloquy and address the very point that we need this infrastructure to
keep doing that, to benefit our consumers at the pump.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I would like to thank the Senator from
Kansas, and with that we will wrap up the colloquy. I would like to
thank my colleagues, and we will be back.

Again, we are looking to work with all of our colleagues here in an
open process to offer amendments and pass legislation that is important
for the American people.

I thank the Presiding Officer, and with that I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source