Press "Enter" to skip to content

Analyst: Republican Keystone XL Rush “Nothing But Negative”

Republicans and Big Oil thought they were so clever shoehorning a rushed 60-day approval process for the Keystone XL pipeline into the payroll tax cut extension last month. Calgary investment house FirstEnergy Capital disagrees:

In a research note to clients today, the Calgary-based investment house had some depressing commentary regarding the controversial pipeline, which would ship growing production from Alberta's bitumen belt and North Dakota's Bakken to U.S. Gulf Coast refineries. In the note, FirstEnergy analyst Steven Paget wrote that the Republican gambit to force Obama's hand and make the 2012 presidential election a referendum on Keystone XL, "is nothing but negative for TransCanada as it makes the pipeline even more of a political issue, and it also means that the pipeline is still unlikely to receive approval until after the November 2012 election" [Darren Campbell, "FirstEnergy Gets Bearish about Keystone XL's Prospects," Alberta Oil, 2012.01.04].

The State Department has said that doing the new Keystone XL review right will take 15 months. The Obama Administration has signaled that forcing a decision in 60 days requires a rejection of the permit. Analyst Paget says Keystone XL backers should hope the President asserts his proper authority over foreign policy (remember, Keystone XL crosses international borders: since when does Congress tell the President how to make foreign policy?), ignores the 60-day mandate, and lets the review process come to a natural conclusion.

Backers of clean water and property rights should hope the President does his best judo: use the Republicans' chicanery to justify denying the Keystone XL permit. The President will wink at all the cheering greens, then hit the campaign trail to cudgel Mitt Romney and John Thune with the charge that Republicans killed all the jobs and energy independence they imagined Keystone XL would bring.

Bonus Keystone XL Irony: TransCanada, a Canadian company, has spent millions of dollars lobbying federal and state governments in the U.S. to promote Keystone XL. Alberta Premier Alison Redford and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper have lobbied Washington on behalf of Keystone XL. But PM Harper wants to somehow block foreign opponents of the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline project from voicing their concerns in Canada's formal regulatory process.

Read more! The Daily Yonder offers an excellent write-up of the different rules on taxes, environmental safety, and eminent domain the Keystone XL pipeline faces across the Plains states. Oklahoma landowner Sue Kelso said her state officials abandoned her in her fight to keep TransCanada from seizing her land through eminent domain (sound familiar, Mike and Sue Sibson?). But sometimes the squeaky wheel manages to avoid the oil: Sue Kelso made enough noise, suing TransCanada to stop their use of eminent domain, to persuade TransCanada to reroute Keystone XL off her property.


  1. Bill Fleming 2012.01.07

    That's kind of fun.

    Obama says to Boehner, McConnell and Thune, "Sorry guys, Hillary sez 'ix-nay on the e-stone-K.' Oh, and Michelle doesn't think we should rush into it either. I tried to warn ya guys. By the way, you got that jobs bill ready yet fellas? I'd sure like to sign that sucker."

  2. Bruce Whalen 2012.01.07

    You should be happy seeing XL sweat it out and the GOP getting the blame. But rest assured both sides are playing games and XL will come anyway. It would be nice to see some honest resistance here.

  3. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.01.07

    Bruce, a straight-up "No" from President Obama would be my preferred outcome. No games, no spin, just the President at the podium, saying, "I read this blog the other day, something called the Madville Times. This guy in South Dakota has been talking smack about TransCanada, its tar sands pipelines, and its use of eminent domain since 2007. He's aboslutely right. We should have stopped Keystone 1. We're stopping Keystone XL. It's bad for America."

  4. Bruce Whalen 2012.01.07

    Lol, maybe he can push aside the prompter long enough to point you out during the speech.

    The Oglala Sioux Tribal Vice President made national news while Obama was in Denver. The infamous interruption came from the tribal veep's protest of XL. For some reason the mainstream media didn't report that little tidbit.

  5. Curt Jopling 2012.01.08

    Obama wins 2012 and the pipeline is approved. Republicans win 2012 and the pipeline is approved. Mr Obama had his chance to stop this and much more. How convenient to postpone this until after the election. So tell me again how I am suppose to hold my nose and vote Obama.

  6. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.01.08

    If Americans Elect run someone reasonable, I'll be hard-pressed to give you that explanation, Curt. If it's just Obama vs. Romney, vote on class warfare: Obama has more life experience with being on the low end of the totem pole, with having to worry about paying the bills. And sit tight: Keystone XL may not be a lost cause for us yet! The President caved to our pressure once; we can get him to do it again!

  7. Charlie Hoffman 2012.01.09

    Real leaders do not "cave" to misguided public perception Cory. They stand up and holler into the microphone what the problem is, the course of action needed, and the path planned in getting there. And do so without regard for political correctness.

    If it is any consolation to you though the anti-petroleum people have already scored a huge victory as just this weekend a Canadian told me that the Xl pipeline will have a fork in it. One running west to the Pacific ocean and the other south into America. One has to assume the Pacific delivery will be put on oil tankers to the Pacific Rim while we import oil from the Middle East.

  8. Charlie Hoffman 2012.01.09

    Bill I agree 100% with the story and love it when we can bring raw product into America and export processed material in any form. That said I am always going to expend more energy working on relationships with friendly neighbors than on those in countries who we must consider the harbingers of terrorism. We cannot fuel our agricultural industry with green energy. The weight of the mechanisms needed to produce electricty outweigh the energy demands of manipulating the soil.

    I believe Cory is wrong in his assumption that we can embrace green energy and live a petroleum free life in America. For starters we now have California importing sugar cane ethanol while we export corn ethanol from the Midwest to their importer. CA environmentalists have usurped common business sense in America and are costing citizens an enormous amount of money. Political correctness wins every time when politicians cave to their demands, and the public loses.

  9. larry kurtz 2012.01.09

    The 234 in Congress who voted aye had received $42 million in campaign contributions from the fossil-fuel industry; the 193 nays, $8 million

  10. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.01.14

    It's something... but it's not the pipeline tax! Let's get some usable revenue out of this beast.

  11. Jana 2012.01.14

    Corey, I don't think we would ever see a pipeline tax...wouldn't fit very well with the people in charge and their dogma.

    Just out of curiosity, what would be the downside to charging them what other state's are getting?

    What are the other Republican governors and legislatures getting that we aren't?

  12. Charlie Hoffman 2012.01.14

    Jana I believe that when a multi-national corporation comes into your state and wants a favor the best debate possible concerns how WE can help you and what YOU can do to best make sure the public believes that I am doing everything I can do to protect U. Take it anywhere from catastrophe to insane profits the public perception never changes.

  13. Charlie Hoffman 2012.01.14

    "If it’s just Obama vs. Romney, vote on class warfare: Obama has more life experience with being on the low end of the totem pole, with having to worry about paying the bills." CAHEIDELBERGER QUOTE

    Cory you and Rush are one in the same. Spamming for a fight, hooking a left hoping for a return right. Barrack Hussein Obama has not worried about his next paycheck or meal or airline ticket back to his Muslim Motherland since he became a US Citizen sometime back around 1979. He is a link for all your readers to contemplate the validity of the current US President. (And you can call me insane, stupid, dumb, ignorant, country, farmer idiot, whatever; the facts don't add up.)

  14. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.01.14

    Whoa, whoa, whoa: 1979?! Charlie, are you declaring yourself a birther here? Are you really going to fly the "Obama is a Muslim" flag? If you are, I'm launching a new discussion thread on that topic.

  15. Charlie Hoffman 2012.01.14

    Cory I do not trust anything Barry has done since he became Barrack. What we see and what we know about Obama is very little. The trusted State Senators I have met from Obama's home state tell me that he never once brought up anything in the Ill State Senate close to what he spoke while running for US President. Everyone today seems to just have given him a pass on his citizenship. I doubt very much that he is far away from George Soros in anything he does.

    If anyone in America wants to stand up and shout out "Obama is a Christian!", please do so now so we know who you are. Whatever he is Cory I do not know, but a Christian he is not. Christian's do not shout out G_d D__n America while attending their weekly church services.

  16. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.01.14

    All right, hold your fire, everyone! Charlie's commentary on the President's religion and citizenship will be promoted to a new thread this evening. Save your comments on that topic until then!

  17. Charlie Hoffman 2012.01.14

    Larry your thread does not work. Private is what comes up. Bring on the change in venue time when Barry became Barrack and why. And what does Hussein, Hussein mean?

  18. Charlie Hoffman 2012.01.14

    Cory do have any idea how many more votes I get in District 23 when arguing with you over Obama?

  19. larry kurtz 2012.01.14

    "He claims that the layer's he found when importing the PDF copy of Obama's birth certificate into Adobe Illustrator prove that it was a forgery. I was able to prove that the layering is a legitimate result caused by software image optimization. I did this by creating a PDF from a JPG image file with OCR and optimization.

    The layers are created as objects during the optimization process, which is a typical occurrence in PDF files. For anyone who cares, I used an HP Officejet 4500 to print and scan and Adobe Acrobat X Pro for the PDF creation process."

  20. Charlie Hoffman 2012.01.14

    Larry why Barry to Barrack?

  21. Charlie Hoffman 2012.01.14

    Early career in Chicago

    After four years living in New York City, Obama moved to Chicago to work as a community organizer. He worked for three years from June 1985 to May 1988 as director of the Developing Communities Project (DCP), a church-based community organization originally comprising eight Catholic parishes in Greater Roseland (Roseland, West Pullman, and Riverdale) on Chicago's far South Side.[43][45][46] During his three years as the DCP's director, its staff grew from 1 to 13 and its annual budget grew from $70,000 to $400,000, with accomplishments including helping set up a job training program, a college preparatory tutoring program, and a tenants' rights organization in Altgeld Gardens.[47] Obama also worked as a consultant and instructor for the Gamaliel Foundation, a community organizing institute.[48] In the summer of 1988, he traveled for the first time to Europe for three weeks then to Kenya for five weeks where he met many of his paternal relatives for the first

  22. Charlie Hoffman 2012.01.14

    History is a wonderful thing to study Larry.

  23. larry kurtz 2012.01.14

    Kinda reminds me of Ben Reifel.

  24. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.01.14

    Dang it! What part of "Hold your fire!" don't you guys understand? ;-) I've got to heat up some supper and finish the dishes. After that, I'll put up a whole new thread where you can focus this discussion.

  25. Charlie Hoffman 2012.01.14

    Benjamin Reifel was born in Parmelee in 1906. His mother was a Brulé Lakota. His father was a German American. Reifel went to South Dakota State College in Brookings. He was student president. After college, he worked for the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs. He helped tribes set up their governments. Then the Second World War began. Reifel joined the United States Army. He served as an officer in Europe. After the war, he went back to work for the bureau. He was in charge of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. He was also a member of the Republican party. He was a good speaker. He could get people to agree with one other. South Dakotans elected him to the United States House of Representatives. The year was 1960. Reifel was the first American Indian from the state to serve in Congress. The voters elected him four more times. In Congress, Reifel helped to keep Ellsworth Air Force Base open. He helped to bring the EROS Data Center to the state. He worked for better schools and hospitals on Indian reservations. He retired from Congress in 1970. For much of his life, Reifel helped Indians and non-Indians get along better. He died in 1990.

  26. Nick Nemec 2012.01.14

    I'm keeping my power dry.

  27. Charlie Hoffman 2012.01.14

    Good to see someone from the country involved in the process.

  28. larry kurtz 2012.01.14

    community organizer or corporate raider?

    ben reifel or frank farrar?

  29. Jana 2012.01.14


    Not sure I understand your reply on getting the best deal/same deal as other states.

    Are you saying that because they are a multi national we should just drop our trousers?

    I don't care if they are multi is business and let's at least craft a deal as good or better than the rest of the states involved.

    And what did you mean by "catastrophe to insane profits?"

  30. Charlie Hoffman 2012.01.14

    Jana the public perception of oil pipelines carries only as far as knowing that someone is looking out for the safety of them. 99% of the public know that we need oil and the cheaper we can get it the better. Loud mouth fringe groups who deamonize petroleum and the industries producing gas and diesel fuel and natural gas and coal energy are really the 1%.

  31. Charlie Hoffman 2012.01.14

    Larry I need to get to a meeting with a good dream catcher; maybe we can get Grud to invite us to breakfast, so I can figure you out.

  32. larry kurtz 2012.01.14

    "According to a report provided from a January 8, 2010 meeting of the South Dakota Governor’s Reentry Council, once released from prison, Native American males recidivated at a rate of 42% which is a much higher rate in comparison to 22.8 percent of the white population.

    This rate is unacceptable and tribal leaders should hold the state accountable. According to this Council, there is a need for “evidence based programming.”"

    How does this look like success, Charlie?

  33. larry kurtz 2012.01.14

    drive a pipeline across virgin earth there will be hell to pay...

  34. Jana 2012.01.14

    So Charlie, in your first sentence you seem to have very little regard for citizens and taxpayers. Are you trying to say that they're ignorant or that they just don't get it.

    "99% of the public know that we need oil and the cheaper we can get it the better." Now admit pulled that number out of your butt.

    So do you know that Transcanada will sell the oil to the US at a cheaper price than we are paying now?

    As a legislator I would guess you would know if we are getting as good or better deal than the other states that have the pipeline passing through. Maybe you could tell us what those other deals were. I'm sure we looked at them when we did our due diligence.

    So do you think South Dakota has made the right moves to make sure we're safe? No leaks on any private property? No risk to any of our water supplies?

    How's their track record on safety? Any spills yet?

  35. Jana 2012.01.14

    I can see why Charlie is so defensive about the oil and gas business. Maybe he can give us some background on campaign donations from out of state energy companies.

  36. larry kurtz 2012.01.18

    Breaking. Scahill says State Dept. not to pursue KXL.

Comments are closed.