Stick to your guns, Rick and Corinna!
Mr. Tsitrian extends and revises his August remarks to maintain that opposition to the Keystone XL tar sands oil pipeline loses votes for Democrats. Tsitrian and I continue to disagree on the merits of the new argument onto which Republicans have latched, that building Keystone XL will free up rail cars to ship South Dakota grain.
Whether or not moving more oil out of Alberta by pipeline would result in more available rail cars in South Dakota remains a dubious prospect. U.S. oil may make up less than 8% of what flows through Keystone XL. Bakken producers can make more money shipping their product by rail east and west rather than south via Keystone XL to the Gulf Coast refineries, which already have plenty of light crude like North Dakota's product.
I maintain that we could get more direct and immediate transportation results for our farmers by a variety of policies:
- Nationalize the railroads.
- Build more railroads.
- Impose a "bumper crop" rule requiring railroads to dedicate a percentage of their hauling capacity to crops that rises with reported stockpiles at prairie elevators.
- Mandate priority for domestic products: U.S. grain moves before Canadian oil.
- Create big immediate tax incentives for training and hiring new truckers to relieve the shortage of road haulers, move more transport to trucks, and free up rail cars for farm products.
Those policy options would have at least as much impact on rail shipping as building Keystone XL, without the harmful side effects, like raising gasoline prices and lowering property values. Imposing regulations on the railroads (who exist by the good graces of government and eminent domain) would not be as socially or environmentally harmful as forcing a pipeline on landowners with eminent domain. Even if we used eminent domain to build a new railroad right along the Keystone XL route instead of the pipeline, we would at least be using eminent domain in its intended spirit, to create a true common carrier that could benefit multiple shippers and other businesses rather than a pipeline that profits one company and hauls one product from one region.
The problem is that to beat Tsitrian and the new GOP spin, we have to explain all that. Tsitrian and I will have immense fun digging up evidence to support our claims (we need a TV show! John, let's buy Gordon Howie's studio!), but we're both past the 30 seconds we need to convince voters, and I'm the one swimming uphill against popular sentiment in favor of Keystone XL.
Even so, beam my brain into Rick Weiland's or Corinna Robinson's body, and I stick to their guns and keep saying to South Dakotans, "You and I agree on most issues, but I'm telling you what I've told you from the start of this campaign: Keystone XL is a net loss for this state. A few more available rail cars won't make up for a letting a Canadian company take our land. I'm just being honest, and that's more than you'll get from my opponents."