Saturday, December 21, 2024

Take a peek behind the curtain and test drive the NEW StateNews.com today!

Pipeline goes beyond partisanship

February 6, 2012

Singh

Our government recently had an opportunity to take a small step toward energy independence. Building the Keystone Pipeline would have allowed oil from Alberta, Canada to be transported down to the Gulf of Mexico. The project would have created thousands of jobs in manufacturing, construction and the possibility of refining some of the oil brought in from Canada.

Initially, the project had support from President Barack Obama and Republicans in Congress. Even certain labor unions, particularly representing construction workers, supported building the pipeline. But because of political infighting, the project ended up being rejected. In my view, the manner in which both parties handled this debate shows they are not serious about energy independence.

Liberal Democrats celebrated the State Department’s decision in mindless opposition to all fossil fuels. They are ignorant of the fact that in spite of innovations in renewable energies, oil will be a large component of our energy consumption for the near future. Rising populations around the world and the growing economic activity at home guarantee increased demand for that oil.

We currently purchase our oil from countries such as Saudi Arabia, whose environmental standards pale in comparison to western countries like our own. Saudi Arabia is a country in which certain charities have been found on many occasions to fund terrorists that kill American soldiers. It is also one of the few countries on earth that does not allow women to drive a car.

I think most Americans would feel more comfortable buying oil from Canada as opposed to from countries that offend our most basic values.

Republicans showed equal stupidity throughout this debate. In order to secure a political win before adjourning last December, the GOP caucus added the pipeline into completely unrelated legislation extending payroll tax relief. The major reason the State Department rejected building the pipeline was because they could not ensure it would be environmentally sound in the one month’s notice given by the GOP.

If Republicans were serious about making America energy independent, they would have introduced the legislation earlier last year and given the State Department more than a month to ensure environmental standards were met. An appropriate timeline for a project of this size requires analysis based on scientific fact-checking and business planning, not political expediency.

Even dumber than the GOP’s tactical chauvinism was a complete non-answer to legitimate environmental concerns surrounding the project. Real people live near the area where the pipeline would have been built. They have every right to make sure their property and water sources are protected. Corporations don’t have the best record with fact-checking these days, and politicians sure as hell don’t either. People have the right to grill both groups before any such project is approved.

Call me naive, but I have full faith that environmental engineers and Stanford paired with Harvard MBAs can figure out a plan to make this pipeline work.

I am sick of people citing “Washington being broken” as evidence that we cannot figure out how to build this pipeline or do anything productive. Divided government is not an impediment to success in our country, it is exactly the model our founding fathers envisioned.

Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton both worked with Congresses that were led by members of the opposing parties. Today’s government should be held to the same standards. There is a deal to be made if there is recognition of a national project — such as energy independence — and the will to solve that problem.

Perhaps policymakers should learn from countries like China, who have been very aggressive in securing a diverse set of energy sources to power their economy. They actually work with their neighbors, like when they purchased a steady supply of natural gas from Russia. The New York Times has reported that China is “poised to build more nuclear reactors in the coming years than the rest of the world combined.”

The reality is that if we don’t purchase the oil sands from the Canadians, someone else will. Natural resources are finite and energy markets are competitive. Last November, Prime Minister Harper told Chinese President Hu Jintao that Canada is eager to sell more oil to China. The Canadian prime minister also told President Obama what he had told the Chinese, signaling that America does not have a monopoly on Canadian oil exports.

This Chinese and the broader international community must wonder how the United States cannot even figure out how to extract and transport natural resources from its next-door neighbor. If policy makers in Washington, D.C., were half as rational as they are partisan, they would be asking themselves the same question.

Ameek Singh is a State News guest columnist and international relations and political theory and constitutional democracy senior. Reach him at sodhiame@msu.edu.

Support student media! Please consider donating to The State News and help fund the future of journalism.

Discussion

Share and discuss “Pipeline goes beyond partisanship” on social media.