Press "Enter" to skip to content

NRSC Anti-Weiland Repeats Old Fibs About ACA-Medicare Savings and Keystone XL Jobs

Republicans are desperate to beat back Rick Weiland's October surge. Alas, the only way the National Republican Senatorial Committee sees fit to do that is through more falsehood:

The two biggest lies in this ad are the claims that (1) Weiland supports cutting $700 billion from Medicare and (2) Keystone XL would create 40,000 jobs.

The claim that the Affordable Care Act cuts $700 billion in Medicare benefits was false before anyone had entered South Dakota's Senate race. The $700 billion claim was false when Mike Rounds made it in May. It's still false.

The claim that Keystone XL will create 40,000 jobs is fuzzy math of Mike Rounds/EB-5 proportions. A couple thousand workers will spend a few months crossing the high plains laying pipe. Some folks in the neighborhood of the work camps will sell more sandwiches. Then the workers and the jobs and the paychecks will go away, and there will be maybe fifty TransCanada workers left to monitor and repair pipe and pump stations.

Republicans have nothing left but falsehood. Voters, don't give your vote to someone who can't tell the truth.

33 Comments

  1. Douglas Wiken 2014.10.21

    And Trans-Canada has told Bloomberg News the primary purpose of the XL Pipeline is to raise gasoline and diesel fuel prices in the midwest by getting the "glut" of crude oil out of here. How many jobs are pipeline jobs in eastern South Dakota. Was the tax revenue a third of what was claimed before construction? SD has been there before. The pumps have already leaked. Defective pipe is being replaced in Texas. Do we really want a handful of jobs from a project which can pollute out aquifers and surface water with dangerous solvents? Democratic candidates are not hammering hard enough on this.

  2. Paul Seamans 2014.10.21

    In regards to the jobs created by the KXL; the worker that buys a sandwich in Winner, SD will not be buying a sandwich in his home state of Michigan; the worker that gets a haircut in Murdo, SD will not be getting a haircut in his home state of Missouri. These kinds of jobs are just transferred from one state to a different state, there is no net gain. The workers will live in man camps with their own mess hall, laundry, medical clinic. There will be a mini boom in towns along the route, nothing to get real excited about.

  3. SDBlue 2014.10.21

    I have a purple Nerf brick I use to throw at the TV when the Minnesota Vikings are playing a lousy football game. I have found it also comes in handy when a campaign ad airs on my TV in support of Mike Rounds.

  4. Les 2014.10.21

    Yes, Lar. As it was in the 80's when it was done to break Russia, again it is being used to break Russia, along with the collateral to the rest of the world.

  5. larry kurtz 2014.10.21

    less is more on today, init?

  6. larry kurtz 2014.10.21

    don't phuc with the duck unless you want the bill.

  7. mike from iowa 2014.10.21

    What Doug W said at the top,C our fearless leader Cory has said a number of times. The KXL pipeline will clear the glut of oil and drive fuel prices up.

  8. Jane 2014.10.22

    40K jobs, and isn't this one of the EB-5 programs that the SDRC was promoting? What is Joop Bollen and Co's role in this transaction? Something is amiss.

  9. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.10.22

    Jane, yes, Bollen and Benda tried to get TransCanada to take EB-5 money for the pipeline. TransCanada demurred.

    Doug offers another line that ought to be the first words out of Rick's mouth at the next debate when Keystone XL comes up. "KXL isn't our first rodeo. TransCanada built Keystone 1 in East River four years ago. Where are those 40,000 jobs?"

  10. Daniel Buresh 2014.10.22

    40,000 jobs is as much of a lie as 50 jobs. I would expect KXL will bring in roughly 20,000 jobs to ND alone. Most wells are producing less than 20% due to transport bottlenecks. They need 4-5 times the number of workers that they currently have to get everything operating at 100%. 3 new refineries in the near future will help as well. It'll be another 2 years but Obama will get it rolling before he leaves office. Thanks Obama.

  11. John Tsitrian 2014.10.22

    Mr. Buresh, considering the way oil prices are collapsing, why do you think there's likely to be rapid expansion of oil production in ND?

  12. Daniel Buresh 2014.10.22

    Winter is around the corner and oil prices will continue to fluctuate, most likely ending higher than they were before. I believe the growth will continue as it has been the past 10 years. I don't see an increase in the rate of actual drilling. I believe that will remain the same. However, the production itself can be increased dramatically simply by having our current wells operate at full capacity. Most barely run 10 days a month before onsite storage tanks are filled and they must wait to be emptied. Right now production is way higher than transport. KXL, numerous smaller pipelines to ND's new refineries, and increased road infrastructure will help with it all.

  13. larry kurtz 2014.10.22

    i just paid $2.69 for gas in Bernalillo.

  14. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.10.22

    20,000 jobs in North Dakota? Did Keystone 1 do that? Given that Keystone XL is going to carry little if any Bakken oil, I am skeptical. I'm gonna need some data and evidence to back that claim, Dan.

    And the question remains whether we want to drill and burn all that oil that fast.

  15. John Tsitrian 2014.10.22

    Mr. Buresh, there's no question that oil prices will continue to fluctuate, but it will probably take some kind of unexpected external shock to make them run substantially higher than they are now, not just through the Winter but through all of '15 and on into '16. If your conclusion that 20k jobs will materialize because oil markets are likely to end higher during the next few months, I'd say that your argument isn't borne out by the futures market for crude. It actually is pricing crude for '16 delivery below $80/bbl. Again, all bets are off if there's an external shock (e.g. war or some other event that could disrupt supplies), but based on current supply/demand projections, the markets appear to be benign. Given that, why do you think production would increase "dramatically?" Here's this morning's futures board from the NYMEX: http://futures.tradingcharts.com/marketquotes/CL_.html

  16. Daniel Buresh 2014.10.22

    KXL will carry a relatively small amount of Bakken oil, but it is going to extremely lighten the amount of canadian crude currently going down the western half of MN and eastern ND. I don't have specific data, just real life experience. I grew up there and all my family is from the bakken. I know what everyone's wells are doing within about 40 miles of my great grandfather's homestead. Much of the info can also be found here if a person knows what to look for: https://www.dmr.nd.gov/oilgas/

    As far as jobs go, I'll give you one example. My best friend Luke started this business in 2008 with a loan and purchased 2 trucks: http://www.tlimagazine.com/index.php/sections/trucking-and-freight/1899-lt-enterprises

    He now has over 70 trucks and is worth close to 20 million dollars. Not too bad for a 29 yr old. When he says he will try to double his workforce the day KXL begins, I tend to believe him. Him along with many other friends in the business have told me the same. Considering their success and being on the front lines, I tend to put my faith in their analysis as it aligns with everything I have been able to gather.

  17. Paul Seamans 2014.10.22

    According to the Dept. of State's Final Supplemental EIS the KXL will set aside 100,000 barrels per day for Bakken oil, only 65,000 bpd has been contracted for. Not exactly any big rush by Bakken producers to sign up for the KXL. Bakken producers like the flexibility to ship crude to where the demand is plus they net more per barrel when shipping by rail. The ONEOK pipeline that was to ship Bakken crude through eastern Montana and Wyoming was dropped because of lack of interest from Bakken producers.

  18. Les 2014.10.22

    The last time the oil was forced artificially low(mid80's), it took over 20 years to recover. We shall see.
    .
    Daniel is right about getting the oil out but XL isn't/wasn't intended for domestic crude of any substantial amount. A well I'm familiar with is averaging 60bpd. Makes for a pretty small return when it could produce beyond 10 times that.
    .
    The OPEC seems content to let the price fall and continue production. The tell on oil will be if it hits the 60's and bounces or languishes. Rigs will start to lay down with oil under 70 for a time.

  19. Les 2014.10.22

    Is there actually a contract for any domestic oil with XL at this point Paul.? I believe Continental had a contract but said it didn't need XL now.

  20. Paul Seamans 2014.10.22

    Les, that is a very good question. I'll have to do some digging on that. If there aren't any current contracts then that kind of voids the argument that the KXL is needed to free up the rail lines for shipping grain. According to friends in Harding County and near Baker, MT that are crossed by the KXL there has been no activity by TransCanada as regards obtaining any easements for the proposed Bakken onramp.

  21. Don Coyote 2014.10.22

    @Paul Seamans. You stated that Bakken producers "net more per barrel when shipping by rail." Why would it cost more to ship by pipeline than rail out of the Bakken Fields? From Larry K's link:

    "It also costs about $25 per barrel to move tar sands crude by rail from Alberta to the Gulf of Mexico, Palmer says. The Keystone Pipeline would cut that transportation price from $25 to $9 a barrel, which is why oil companies are so eager to see the pipeline move forward."

    While the cost differentials will vary due to distance, the shippings dynamics should hold true for both Canadian oil and Bakken oil.

  22. Paul Seamans 2014.10.22

    Don Coyote, I should have explained that a little better; they make more by shipping by rail because the Bakken crude can be shipped to where the demand is whether it be to Illinois, Washington State, or even California. The KXL will only go to the Gulf where the refineries are set up to handle heavy crudes like the tarsands crude, not the crude like the Bakken crude. A couple of months ago Harold Hamm of Continental Resources, the biggest player in the Bakken, was quoted that he nets $24 more per barrel from shipping by rail. Harold said that although he had contracted for space on the KXL that he didn't need it now and probably won't use it. Another thing, the BNSF is investing $5-$7 billion a year in upgrades, I don't think Warren Buffet would be investing that kind of money in rail upgrades unless he believes that a lot of oil will move by rail.

  23. ColtarTheBarbarian 2014.10.22

    So much for the Rounds offensive not going negative.

  24. Don Coyote 2014.10.22

    @Paul Seaman. The facts remain:

    Given a choice, it's still safer and cheaper to ship by pipeline vs rail. It just needs to be available which it isn't in great capacities around Bakken. Currently only 11% of oil pumped daily in the US was shipped by rail.

    Interesting remark from Harold Hamm in the WSJ. "But Mr. Hamm said he thinks the situation will be short lived. "Rail is still a temporary thing," he said. "If rail hadn't been available, there would have been pipelines built.""

    Sounds like Hamm will go with whoever can move his oil but he knows ultimately that pipeline is going to move it cheapest and safest.

    http://online.wsj.com/articles/dangers-aside-railways-reshape-crude-market-1411353150

  25. Paul Seamans 2014.10.23

    Don Coyote, I will concede that it is cheaper to ship crude by pipeline but then I am not terribly concerned about the bottom line of the major oil companies. I will have to respectively disagree with your contention that pipelines are safer. It's been a year now that a farmer in North Dakota discovered oil in his field from a leaking Tesoro pipeline and they are still working on cleaning up the 20,000 barrel (840,000 gallon) spill. They are digging down 50 feet and still coming up with contaminated soil, consider what the situation would be if a spill like this happened with the KXL over the Ogallala Aquifer in Nebraska. The water table there is often at ground level and the chemicals associated with tarsands crude would be almost impossible to clean up. I contend that the tarsands crude should be left in the ground and that the KXL is a pipeline that was a bad idea and that it is not needed.

  26. JeniW 2014.10.25

    When there is mention of the pipeline, I always think of the gold mining industry.

    In its glory days, jobs and wealth were promised. Yes, there were jobs and wealth, but where is the gold mining industry now?

    About all that is left of the gold mining industry in SD, California, and other states where gold mining took place, are old, broken down buildings, and the environmental ugliness.

    I predict that is what will eventually happen with the pipeline. But, I guess it will not matter because we will be long dead, will not care any longer, and can shrug it off to let the next generation(s) deal with it.

  27. mike from iowa 2014.10.25

    Paul Seamans- when life hands you a lemon you make lemonade. Imagine the intense joy that frac-sand grubbers would exhibit if the Ogallala Acquifer was contaminated. All that water would be suitable for fracking in the Black Hills,Texas,Oklahoma and every where else they use billions of gallons of water they can't possibly reclaim. Best bet is to keep the SOB's away from possibly contaminating the acquifer in the first place.

Comments are closed.