[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 14]
[Senate]
[Pages 20120-20121]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          KEYSTONE XL PROJECT

  Mr. BLUNT. Mr. President, the House yesterday passed a bill that 
included an effort to move forward on the Keystone XL Pipeline project, 
and I wish to talk about that project for a while today and American 
energy generally.
  We all agree private sector job creation needs to be the No. 1 
priority in Washington. One of the best ways to jump-start job creation 
is simply through good energy projects. The shortest path to more 
American jobs is more American energy.
  Unfortunately, the President and the administration have delayed one 
of the largest domestic, shovel-ready projects until after the election 
next year. This is a project that is ready to go. The States this 
project would go through have cleared the way for the project. There is 
no government money involved. This just takes a government OK, saying: 
Yes, it is all right to create these jobs. These jobs not only have the 
short-term impact of creating the jobs that are created to build the 
pipeline but the long-term impact of all the economic activity that 
occurs because of this new North American energy to which we would have 
access. In delaying this program, the President is simply stalling the 
creation of thousands of jobs and postponing not only the growth in our 
economy but also a move toward more energy security.
  Not too many years ago, I don't think one could say with a straight 
face that we need to do everything we can to create something that 
closely resembles energy independence. We are in a situation now with 
North American energy where we can do that. The numbers on the Keystone 
XL project speak for themselves.
  This project would create 20,000 direct jobs during the construction 
phase--20,000 jobs. That is why the labor union movement in the country 
supports this project. Twenty thousand jobs to build the pipeline. It 
would generate $20.9 billion in new private sector spending. It would 
generate around $5 billion in new State, local, and Federal revenue 
when this project is being built and when this project is completed. 
Nationwide, the project would benefit 1,400 American job creators.
  The Keystone XL project would also help reinforce America's energy 
security by reducing our dependence on other parts of the world. With 
Canada, our largest trading partner, it is a miracle relationship, this 
large border that we don't worry very much about, all the back-and-
forth economic activity that occurs. In fact, for every $1 we would 
send to Canada for that energy, they would send 91 cents back. So this 
is $1 we are spending to get 91 cents back, to be more of an energy 
partner with our closest neighbor--we have clearly a bigger border with 
Canada than we do with Mexico--to be an energy partner with our closest 
neighbor rather than to worry about energy in places where, frankly, 
they don't like us very well. If they do like us, they

[[Page 20121]]

don't get the money back to us in the same way.
  In fact, by comparison, of the 91 cents we would get back for every 
$1 we send to Canada for North American energy coming out of Canada, we 
get 49 cents back from Saudi Arabia. That doesn't mean Saudi Arabia is 
a bad trading partner. It just means they are not as good a trading 
partner as the Canadians are. We get 33 cents back from Venezuela. So 
why would we want to send $1 to Venezuela or $1 to Saudi Arabia for 
energy if we could send $1 to Canada and almost all of that $1 comes 
right back to us?
  Domestically, this project would help encourage more oil production 
in the Bakken formation in the Upper Great Plains. The Bakken 
formation--which I sure didn't know about 15 years ago and I don't know 
that anybody did--is thought to be the greatest new energy development 
since Prudhoe Bay in the 1960s. I read somewhere the other day that 
North Dakota has become the fourth or fifth energy-producing State in 
the country, passing Oklahoma. This is a great resource right at the 
incoming border of where this new pipeline and all this energy activity 
would be.
  Regardless of the White House's decision to delay this project, the 
Canadian oil sands will be developed. It is not a question of whether 
there is going to be a market; it is who gets the market. The Canadians 
have said, as they should: If we don't build a pipeline through the 
United States to the refineries in the Southern part of the United 
States, we are going to build that same pipeline in another direction. 
Most likely, the pipeline will go to the Pacific coast and then the 
energy goes to Asia.
  Why would we want energy going to Asia from a trading partner where 
we get 91 cents back rather than energy coming here? Why would we want 
to buy more energy from the Middle East and less energy than we could 
buy from our neighbor? Why would we think for a minute that the energy 
security of the country would be better served in any other way than 
this one?
  So this is going to most likely go to Asia. If it doesn't go to Asia, 
I guess it can go to the Atlantic coast and go to Europe. But what 
everybody believes is, if it doesn't come here, they just turn the 
pipeline to the west instead of the south, and those oil sands, that 
great energy resource goes somewhere else rather than where it makes 
more sense for us to get it or more sense for them to send it.
  This is as close to an energy no-brainer as I can think of. But the 
majority leader says this project is dead on arrival in the Senate. I 
don't believe he meant just dead on arrival if it was part of a package 
that extended the payroll tax. I think the quote was: ``It is dead on 
arrival.'' It is not going to go anywhere in the coming year, at a time 
when we need those jobs. Eventually, we all know as quickly as we can 
get it, we need to be more dependent on North American energy and less 
dependent on energy everywhere else.
  There have been many reports that say the administration's timing is 
in consideration for the reelection effort. This appears to be about 
one American job instead of more American jobs, and we need to be 
concerned about more American jobs.
  Some reports have noted that the President's advisers ``fear that a 
decision in favor of the project could dampen enthusiasm among 
volunteers needed for door-to-door campaigning in battleground 
States.''
  I thought that bus went to battleground States. That should be enough 
to get to battleground States. We shouldn't have to worry about not 
having these volunteers because we choose to do what makes sense for us 
in the energy situation.
  Others have noted that ``the President decided to punt on this 
project in order to placate parts of the coalition that elected him in 
2008.''
  Americans are looking for jobs, not more of the same from Washington. 
This isn't time for politics. We need to jump-start the private sector 
economy. Again, I will say, the quickest road to more American jobs is 
more American energies.
  For the better part of 60 years, we have used more energy than we 
could produce. The marketplace is there. The consumer is there. The 
user is there. This is what capitalism is all about. It is what free 
enterprise is all about, figuring out how to connect the product with 
the consumer. So we know the consumer is there. Let's do what we can to 
connect that consumer with the energy needs they have.
  According to a Gallup poll, the sharp decline in the workforce last 
month may have more of a reflection on the large number of Americans 
deciding to give up looking for work. Let's do things that energize the 
economy and energize the American workforce.
  I am glad to be a sponsor of the North American Energy Security Act. 
The House again pursued this week a similar policy as part of their 
effort to vote on a payroll tax extension, with this as an effort to 
create new jobs. Whether it is the Keystone Pipeline or the Utility 
MACT rule that slows down people's decisions to make a job-creating 
decision or other EPA rules and potential rules that make people think 
twice and three times and eventually enough times you don't do it about 
job creation or what we need to do to get to the oil and gas shale 
reserves of the country or oil in the Gulf of Mexico, let's do what is 
necessary for North America. Let's make North American energy work for 
America. I don't know a better way to do that at less government cost 
or less government involvement than the Keystone Pipeline.
  I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. COONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________