ShareThis Page
Vote on Keystone XL pipeline hangs in balance |

Vote on Keystone XL pipeline hangs in balance

Climate advocates and representatives from the Rosebud Sioux Tribe in South Dakota protest against the Keystone XL pipeline on Monday, Nov. 17, 2014, in front of the home of Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., in Washington.
Climate advocates and representatives from the Rosebud Sioux Tribe in South Dakota protest against the Keystone XL pipeline on Monday, Nov. 17, 2014, in front of the home of Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., in Washington.

WASHINGTON — Supporters of the Keystone XL pipeline in the Senate scrambled Monday to gather one last vote to pass a bill that authorizes the project that would help send Canadian oil to the Gulf of Mexico, a task that became harder when President Obama made his toughest comments yet on the topic.

Momentum appeared to be going against the pipeline as Democratic Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia said that he would vote against it Tuesday.

At the same time, Democratic Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan proclaimed to reporters, “I’m voting no,” and independent Sen. Angus King of Maine said he “probably” would vote against approving the oil pipeline. King added that he would make his final decision during the vote “when they get to the Ks” in the roll-call.

The three senators have been heavily lobbied by pipeline backers. Rockefeller and Levin are retiring at year’s end and some thought they could be persuaded to vote yes in a matter that appears to be going down to the wire.

Sen. Mary Landrieu, a Louisiana Democrat, is co-sponsoring the bill with Republican Sen. John Hoeven of North Dakota.

She awaits a runoff next month for another six-year term and has been working hard to gather the 60th vote needed to pass a bill that the House approved Friday.

“I feel very comfortable,” Landrieu was quoted by CNN as saying.

Late Monday, Hoeven said: “We’ve got 59 announced (supporters). I think we’ll get there, but I don’t know for sure until we have the vote.” Hoeven said there were still some “maybes” but he would not elaborate.

The Senate is expected to vote as early as 6:15 p.m. Tuesday on the TransCanada pipeline, which would transport more than 800,000 barrels of oil per day.

All 45 Senate Republicans support the pipeline, and backers need 60 votes under an agreement outlining the rules for debating and passing the bill.

Obama criticized the project during a trip to Asia last week, saying it would not lower fuel prices for drivers but would allow Canada to “pump their oil, send it through our land, down to the gulf, where it will be sold everywhere else.”

His adviser, John Podesta, reiterated Obama’s message in a call with reporters Monday: “I would just repeat what he said, which is we ought to take the time to let the process play out and let the analysis come in.”

The State Department has been studying the pipeline proposal, and its approval is needed because the project crosses an international border.

Republicans and energy analysts said those comments likely meant Obama was leaning toward vetoing any Keystone bill that passes, either this year or early next year.

“The president … is basically threatening a veto this time,” said Ryan Bernstein, an aide to Hoeven.”Obviously, this makes it harder to gather votes.”

Many environmentalists oppose Keystone, saying that it would spike emissions linked to climate change and that the oil could be sold abroad. Construction workers and other supporters say it would lead to thousands of jobs.

Hoeven plans to reintroduce the bill in January or February if it does not pass. Supporters could introduce a stand-alone bill or attach Keystone language to another bill that would be hard for Obama to veto.

Republicans say they will have 60 votes next year because of the party’s strong showing in this month’s midterm elections, which will give them new senators including Joni Ernst of Iowa and Cory Gardner of Colorado.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.