Wednesday, February 11, 2015
House Expected To Pass Keystone BIll
The House has intended to pass a Keystone Bill on Wednesday despite President Obama vowing to use his veto power. The bill would have a pipeline going from Canada to the Gulf Coast put in. Oil Companies and Republicans are pushing very hard for this to get passed. Republicans are making this their first bill to send to Obama this year. Since Obama is going to veto this it will most likely not become a law. Do you think that since the House is now majority Republican but our president is still Democrat that even less with get done in Washington then already is?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
As I have said many times before, climate change is an issue that needs to be paid attention. It's great that this pipeline would help the economy and create jobs but if it is hurting the environment exacerbating climate change is it really worth it?
ReplyDeleteThere must be a better way to help the economy and create jobs without destroying our planet. If we aren't doing much to prevent climate change, we shouldn't do more to worsen the issue. The number of jobs created would only represent less than 1/10 of 1% of the economy... not worth it.
ReplyDeleteA few key points in this article caught my attention. Firstly, I did find it peculiar that Congress has spent so much time on a bill that they know will not make it beyond Obama's desk. Secondly, the symbolism of the pipeline fascinated me. Studies showed that the economy and the climate would not be terribly affected by the creation of this pipeline yet the two political extremes are fighting for their beliefs to extremes. I think this also creates an interesting picture of how the next two years will look in Washington. But back to the original topic of discussion, I don't think the pipeline is a good idea because, even though the Canadian sands serve as a new resource for oil, they too will run out eventually. Instead of putting resources towards out dependence on fossil fuels, we should be passing laws to encourage alternative, sustainable energy.
ReplyDeleteThere are far too many extremes in this article. The article clearly states that this is pipeline will not drastically affect the environment. It also clearly states that it will not create the multitude of jobs it is believed to. In which case, neither of theses two points can truly be used to debate passing this bill. There needs to be compromise, but that is not going to happen. It's (unfortunately) unlikely that the Republican majority Congress and President Obama are ever going to agree on issues like this. Dysfunction at its finest.
ReplyDeleteI find this topic very interesting. Just as environmentalists rallied around the publishing of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, environmentalists are now rallying around the Keystone Pipeline. While the environmental impacts are not going to be terribly detrimental, it would not be a good idea to funnel resources into building an oil sands pipeline when we could be funneling resources into developing sustainable technology. Also, when I hear a bunch of nobel prize laureates denouncing the pipeline due to environmental reasons, I am inclined to go against building it...after all, they are distinguished experts in their fields (we should probably listen to them).
ReplyDeleteI agree with Emily. This article is very extreme and the issue is made out to be more than it is. It is a symbolic struggle between the Republicans and Democrats, and the big business interests against the environmentalist interests. Yes, it is going to create jobs and, yes, it will have some environmental impact, but the extent to which it will do both is not as great as each side says. This is just the Republicans testing Obama and trying to portray him in a bad light to attempt to further their own interests in the future.
ReplyDeleteClimate change is such an issue that keeps on getting worse. Should we really add to that? Are the small amount of jobs that'll be made worth risking the health of our Earth? I agree with Rachel, there must be some other way.
ReplyDeleteClimate change is turning into one of those things that keeps coming up and isn't getting the needed attention. In reading that the pipeline "would harm the environment and could contribute to climate change" I don't think it's right for right now. The disfunction represented over this bill sadly I think is a foreshadowing of how Congress and President Obama will interact for awhile.
ReplyDeleteI find the ability of the Republican party to prioritize there own well being over those they were elected to represent and protect. Climate change is not only an issue that will effect every american in the future, but every person on the planet. The argument that the environmental tole of the pipeline is outstayed by the number of job creations seems silly to me. If we instead invested in alternative energies that would slow climate change, we would hit two birds with one stone. Less environmental tole, and job growth.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Carolanne that the net gain from the jobs gained is not equivalent to the net cost of the climate change issue. People underestimate the impact of the average global temperature going up 1 degree, but that is extremely significant. And if it goes up more, it could result in melted ice-caps, raised ocean levels, and flooding of coastal cities such as Los Angeles and Miami could occur.
ReplyDeleteClimate change is real and we need to do something about it instead of putting it off to the side. We need to invest in alternative energies. Even though this will create alot of jobs...it is not worth it. Our planet has been damaged enough already and we cannot risk to keep sabotaging it.
ReplyDelete