The surface transportation bill, which passed out of the Senate Environment and Public Works committee on a unanimous vote, has been mired on the Senate floor for close to a month. Senate Republicans have filibustered all efforts to wrap up work on the bill, mainly because they sought a series of bumper-sticker amendment votes to make vulnerable Democrats uncomfortable. They know the bill has broad support and will eventually pass, but if they can hold together on cloture votes, they can block it until they get their way on amendments. Most of them have nothing to do with transportation policy. Fully 1/12 of the Senate’s time this year, then, will be spent on a standoff over squeezing election-year message votes out of the majority. Yeah, the Senate rules are just fine.
A long-sought deal on amendments was finally reached last night. Thirty amendments will be allowed onto the floor for a vote, and then the bill will move to its final passage. This sets up the Senate to jam the House with the bill, something John Boehner may resign himself to passing.
The Senate will begin slogging through the amendments on Thursday, and it’s possible that a vote on passage of the bill could come that night. However, it’s likely that action on the bill will drag over until Tuesday, when senators return from a weekend break.
Reid, a Nevada Democrat, plans to immediately send the bill over to the House, where GOP leaders have been struggling to corral enough votes to pass their own five-year bill. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, warned rank-and-file Republicans at a closed-door meeting Wednesday that if they don’t act quickly to pass their own bill, he will bring the Senate bill to the House floor for a vote, lawmakers who attended the meeting said.
“You don’t like that? I don’t like it either. Why would any of us like it?” Boehner was quoted as saying by a Republican aide present in the meeting. “It means punting on the opportunity to pass an infrastructure bill that bears our stamp.” The aide asked not to be identified because he wasn’t authorized to speak publicly.
Boehner is about to lose this round if he cannot corral his members.
But what are these amendments that will get votes starting today? A couple are Democratic priorities, like extending renewable energy tax breaks that expired last year. But most of them are Republican message votes. They will vote today on delaying EPA rules on industrial boilers, as well as on a measure that would mandate construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. On the last one, the White House has been lobbying members to block the amendment.
The White House lobbying effort, including phone calls from the president to Democrats, signals that the vote could be close when it heads to the floor Thursday. The president is trying to defeat an amendment that would give election-year fodder to his Republican critics who have accused him of blocking a job-creating energy project at a time of high gas prices.
The amendment, proposed by Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.), states that Obama would have no role in such cross-border permitting decisions since, in this case, the pipeline would originate in Canada. The measure would need 60 votes to pass, and Obama has already lost two Democrats who back the proposal – Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Mary Landrieu – and is at risk of losing more moderates and vulnerable Democrats.
Democrats could lose up to 12 and still carry the vote. The intervention by the White House suggests that they may lose more.




31 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
The only purpose in doing that is to score political points.
Isn’t that the only purpose driving a Senator or member of the House nowadays?
INdeed, they don’t give a shit about us. Eveything is either 1) a pissing match or B) payback or benefits to the 1%.
If we don’t get term limits and campaigh finance reform, we are DOOMED as a nation. Mexico is gonna have to build a fence ON THEIR SIDE.
..
..
FYI, Guadalajara is very nice and San MIguel de Allende ha a large ex-pat population of retired Americans.
I don;t always drink beeer. But, when I do, I prefer Dos Equis. Stay thirsty my friends.
Since we are ALL Texans here….why don’t we want the Keystone PIpeline???? Doesn’t that help Texas??
Fuck that shit. The risk of polluting along the route, combined with the fact that a large part of the product will be exported, makes it worthless in my eyes.
Actually, they announced Monday that they’re going ahead with the project without government approval. I’ll try to find the link. They’re going ahead with the $1.3B section from OK to Houston first, followed by the Canada crossing after they get approval after the election.
That’s why the vote to “mandate” construction is all politics.
It is basically worthless to everyone but the employees and shareholders of XL (Boehner is one) and the Chinese who need the oil and will be the main recipient of the refined oil. Texas gets the goop they can’t use and the CO2 from extracting the tarsands will go to everyone. We are at 392 ppm of CO2 now and need to be under 350 according to 350.org. Tipping point here we come!
I appreciate your response. BUt, hasn’t the Alaska pipeline turned out to be a pretty “good thing”?
BTW, I’m not “playing” dumb. THis is all just outside my area of expertise.
Bear with me guys…..Why is America selling Canadian oil to the Chinese???
What part of Texas is Canada in anyway?
The Alaska pipeline, in my understanding, is only a ‘good thing’ in the sense that whoever was in power when it was given the go-ahead negotiated annual revenue sharing or Alaskans. Other than that, the pipeline construction still destroyed environments and still pollutes.
Because that’s how we fucking ROLL.
Or, because it’s not America. It’s XL, they can sell their oil to whoever the hell they want.
Because Canadians had a shit fit and blocked the pipeline proposal to the west in British Columbia. Seems Canadians don’t want to foul their own nest like Americans do.
Allright. You’ve convinced me.
Friggin’ Canadians. Nothin’ up there but hookers and hockey players.
(Let’s see if anybody know this joke)
The White House has an interesting spin:
In other words, since Rich Conservative Republicans in Nebraska succeeded in making XL redesign the pipeline route to avoid their backyard (which delays the construction at least six months anyway) we just made it look like we were against it being approved for political expediency (our strength) and will quickly approve the project after the election.
Reduce the trade deficit?
You MEAN what part of TEXAS is Canada in??????
Northern part.
Sounds like a plan to me.
Can we charge them $280 million a barrel??????
Alaska oil is sold into Asia.
A viable, approve-able route for Alaska oil across Canada into the the Mid-east/north-east conflicted with the plan to shut down east coast refineries so as to justify higher east coast pricing.
Again with Keystone, while a bit harder than Alaska because the oil shale oil is so thick so getting to a warmer south saves a bit of transport money, they could again build the pipeline into those now closed east coast refineries and actually provide a few jobs.
But the plan is to use the Saudi owned refinery in Houston and then export product out of the US so as to not cause a lowering of the price level in the US.
We get about 100 new long term pipeline jobs and a years work for 15,000 in getting it built. A poor return on environmental risk and no new supply into the US with the current oil over-supply in the mid-west drained into Houston so they can raised gas prices in the mid-west by 30 cents a gal. Heck of a deal.
And since we both import and then export this oil shale oil from Canada, the US trade deficit will not be greatly affected.
oops, screwed up my only Texas quip. I guess I’m all hat and no cattle.
I can’t seem to find any information on a Saudi owned refinery in Houston. Is it a joint venture?
Motiva is owned by shell and Saudi’s
Cool. So calling it Saudi owned is as accurate as calling it American owned I guess.
Makes you wonder about the veracity of the other assertions.
Insert half in between Saudi and owned and all other assertions would be correct @21.
Nice. That might be a good rule of thumb.
A lot of folks throw around a lot of “truthes”. We could just insert “half” in front and be correct.
The counter message to the XL Pipeline has been really bungled.
Progressives should come out strongly for it by arguing the Chinese auto drivers deserve cheaper gas, and to further the development of a stronger and larger Chinese middle class who depend on cheap gasoline, anything to promote increased US gasoline and oil exports must be supported, starting with the XL pipeline.
And if you post the US gasoline price map with the pipeline drawn in, you can see how the pipeline will drain the flood of cheap gasoline from the upper West centered on Cushing.
Silly me, I interpreted your statement that since papau was half wrong about the ownership of the refinery that now you doubted the “veracity” of all his assertions.
Well, you’ve provided me with the decoder-ring. I was under the assumption that everything stated was the truth, but if I’m supposed to insert “half”, then there’s no reason to doubt the veracity of his half-truths.
In other words, the rich in the US can’t find enough quick bucks to be made in building pipelines from Cushing to export refineries in the Gulf for instant capital gains speculative pillage and plunder, so we must depend on foreign capitalists who are investing in long term returns in buy, build, and hold-to-operate capitalism.
Pipelines inside the US built by US corporations are nearly totally unregulated at the Federal level, the regulation on building and operate limited only to
- acting as utilities serving all equally
- and in a few cases needing to justify a need, like justifying the need to build added natgas pipelines to the NJ refineries shutdown for lack of natgas to cut costs below import gasoline costs, or to provide gas for heating in New England to reduce dependency on heating oil imports or to power cogen electric generators.
The EPA has no say in any utility lines until after they cause environmental harm – only State environmental laws apply.
The fight between the EPA and Texas is the EPA is requiring Texas to regulate past construction which has resulted in environmental harm, and Texas is fighting to be allowed to pollute and harm not just Texas and Texans, but everyone down stream of its pollution. To be in compliance with clean air/water Federal law, Texas needs to regulate its infrastructure which can most cheaply be done before construction starts.