Guest Editorial – Keystone: Why the Dollars and Cents Matter

Keystone: Why the Dollars and Cents Matter
Katie Tubb, Heritage Foundation

Anyone familiar with the Keystone XL Pipeline debate is familiar with the name Tom Steyer. The billionaire has spent millions on his campaign fighting the Keystone XL Pipeline and its alleged contribution to global warming. He and others along with him have pledged $100 million in campaign funds to candidates taking a stand against global warming this year and will likely spend millions more before this battle is fought out.

But can he replace the billions of dollars in positive economic impact the pipeline is expected to create, or the billions more in tax revenues Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas are projected to collect over the operating life of the pipeline?

It’s not just about cold dollars and cents. Keystone could create thousands of jobs and the southern portion, which didn’t need a presidential permit, has already employed some 4,000 people. And that isn’t even considering the additional work for businesses that support the project – from pipe manufacturers to local diners and real estate agents. Opponents are quick to quibble that these are temporary jobs – a statement about as helpful as reminding us that the sun rises in the east. Construction jobs by nature are temporary jobs. What is important is that Keystone is yet one more opportunity for someone to work in an economy that is painfully recovering.

Over the past 10 years, oil, coal, and natural gas have supplied 87 percent of the energy America uses. These conventional fuels are simply the most energy efficient, inexpensive, and abundant energy sources. But even if one were to assume climate alarmists’ models are correct (though they give us very little reason to assume this) and politicians decide to cut all U.S. carbon dioxide emissions today—no Keystone XL Pipeline, no driving or flying, no running factories, stores or homes unless they run on nuclear power—this would only decrease world temperatures by 0.08 degrees Celsius by the year 2050.

Regardless, wouldn’t we want people to have good paying jobs so that they have the means to respond and care for themselves if global warming does become a problem? They certainly can’t depend on the federal government to come to the rescue as victims of Hurricane Sandy, caused by global warming according to activists, are learning the hard way.

While the Obama Administration has delayed a final decision using every excuse in the book to appease the well-funded environmental left, the ranks in favor of the pipeline are growing. Former Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, former Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, and the President of the AFL-CIO Richard Trumka have all spoken in favor of the pipeline, noting that it isn’t an environmental issue but a political one. Democrats in both the House and the Senate have bucked the party line and supported the pipeline and even editorial boards like the Washington Post’s have called the delay “embarrassing.” According to a Rasmussen poll, 61 percent of Americans are in favor of finishing the pipeline.

The can’ts, won’ts, and better nots opposing the Keystone XL Pipeline ignore a whole host of reasons why the Keystone XL Pipeline should have been approved years ago. While it’s important to study the environmental and economic impacts of such a large project and to assure that best practices will be followed (as has been done with Keystone), it’s high time the President approve the pipeline or that Congress do it for him.

10 thoughts on “Guest Editorial – Keystone: Why the Dollars and Cents Matter”

  1. With all these billions and gadzillions of dollars this project is going to generate maybe they could share some of it with all of the landowners that were threatened with condemnation and then given a one time payment. Landowners who will bear the burden of potential property value loss and will have to deal with future encroachments by the company not to mention the worry of a possible failure. One time payments on perpetual easements need to go away……

    1. Kind of like the one-time payments that the feds give to farmers for wetland easements. Perpetual, can’t farm or drain it forever. However, the pipeline easements do not prevent the farmer from farming the land over the pipeline.

      My dad had a major natural gas pipeline go across his land. Before it was put in, opponents of it said nothing would grow above it, there would be leaks, etc. Well, in the 30 years since it was buried there has never been a problem and you cannot see where it went.

      It’s all scare tactics. Let the building begin.

  2. The failure to build keystone has a domino of negative effects. One of which is the dearth of rail service to carry crops to market. Ultimately, that costs farmers and raises the price of food. Raising the price of food hurts people with fixed or limited income. Why does Obama hate the poor?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>