[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Page 753]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, this morning I rise in support of two 
amendments that will make it clear to the American people exactly what 
this bill to authorize the Keystone XL Pipeline is all about and whom 
our Republican friends from across the aisle are trying to help.
  The amendments offered by Senators Markey and Franken would ensure 
that the pipeline benefits the American consumer and the American 
economy. Without them, the bill to authorize the pipeline will benefit 
narrow special interests, such as foreign oil companies, not hard-
working Americans.
  We have heard from several of my friends on the other side of the 
aisle, including the lead sponsor, that the Keystone bill is a jobs 
bill and an energy bill. That may be true, but without Senator Markey's 
amendment it is nothing but a Canadian energy bill, and without Senator 
Franken's amendment it is a paltry jobs bill.
  First, on energy, in short, the Keystone bill will allow one Canadian 
company to use the United States as a middleman to ship oil to the 
highest bidder abroad. The Canadian oil company, TransCanada, refuses 
to commit to keeping the crude oil or the refined products in America. 
Canadian tar sands oil is already traveling through gulf coast 
refineries on its way to foreign markets, and, as the Wall Street 
Journal has reported, much of the crude oil that would flow through the 
Keystone XL Pipeline would ultimately be exported as refined product.
  Why not add to this bill a requirement that any oil products 
transported through the Keystone XL Pipeline be consumed in America? 
Plain and simple, that is exactly what Senator Markey's amendment would 
do. If Republicans are serious about improving our energy security, 
they will support Senator Markey's amendment.
  Second, let's talk about whether this is a real jobs bill. 
Republicans and supporters of the project like to cite that building 
the pipeline will support American industries and American jobs in iron 
and steel, but a 2011 analysis by Cornell University found that 50 
percent or more of the steel pipe will be manufactured outside the 
United States.
  It is no wonder that even the most optimistic job projections about 
the Keystone Pipeline are a drop in the bucket compared to just 1 month 
of job growth in our country. In the final tally, the State Department 
report says it will create only 35 permanent jobs.
  Why not guarantee in the bill that U.S.-made iron, steel, and 
manufactured goods be used to build the pipeline? That is exactly what 
Democrats have offered in an amendment worked out by Senators Franken 
and Wyden.
  These amendments should be bipartisan. Republicans have supported 
several measures in the past. I know many of my Republican colleagues 
voted to ban the export of oil drilled in the ANWR in Alaska. I hope 
they will join us on this amendment as well.
  If Republicans oppose us, they will be making it crystal clear to 
Americans that they are on the side of narrow special interests instead 
of on the side of America's middle class. They will be supporting 
special interests over American jobs.
  Let me be clear. We think the Keystone Pipeline should not be built, 
and there are several reasons for that, among them that the pipeline 
may accelerate global climate change. Tar sands oil is far dirtier than 
conventional crude oil. Democrats would much rather see an energy bill 
that promotes clean energy sources such as solar and wind, industries 
which create far more jobs, both construction and manufacturing, using 
far cleaner energy than the pipeline.
  Why not have a policy that produces many more jobs with the cleanest 
of energy rather than very few jobs with the dirtiest energy on the 
North American continent?
  But if Keystone is going to be built, we think it shouldn't only 
benefit Canadian oil companies and overseas steel manufacturers but 
should actually benefit average families and the American worker.
  To conclude, I note that instead of a real energy bill or a real jobs 
bill or a real infrastructure bill or immigration or any bill to 
address the greatest problems facing our country at the moment--the 
decline in middle-class incomes and the lack of middle-class jobs--for 
their first proposed action in the 114th Congress, S. 1, Republicans 
have chosen a permit for a foreign oil company that would create 35 
permanent jobs. This is not an opening with a bang; this is an opening 
with a whimper. It is like leading off a new baseball game with a bunt.
  Democrats can't change what bills Republicans put on the calendar, 
but our amendments will show a clear and stark contrast if Republicans 
vote no. On these amendments and more, Republicans are going to have to 
make a choice: Will they continue to fight for narrow special interests 
or will they work with Democrats to advance America's middle class by 
creating more jobs and putting more money in the pockets of American 
families? Time and these votes will tell.
  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. THUNE. Mr. President. I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________