Keystone XL Pipeline

Floor Speech

Mr. HOEVEN. I wish to begin by thanking my esteemed colleague from the great State of North Dakota. I appreciate very much his support for this important project as he has again expressed. This is something we worked on for a great length of time. It is something we have quite a bit of background and experience with, energy production and the infrastructure needs that go with it. Again, I express my appreciation to Senator Conrad for his support of the project, and also for expressing, and I think doing so in very eloquent terms and in terms that are very much appreciated, that he feels this is something that needs to advance; that he feels as we work forward in terms of determining how to handle the payroll tax cut holiday issue, this is something that can be helpful and constructive.

I am here to speak in support of the Keystone project. You might say, Why? Why is it important that we move forward with this project? Well, first and foremost, because it is a tremendous job creator, but also because it reduces our dependence on foreign sources of oil as well as improving environmental stewardship. I want to take a minute to talk about all three aspects of the legislation.

Together with my colleagues, I put forward the North American Energy Security Act of 2011. Essentially, that legislation clears the path to move forward with the Keystone XL Pipeline project.

For those who may not be familiar with the Keystone XL Pipeline, I brought this chart that actually shows the route it travels. It is a 1,700-mile-long pipeline which runs from Alberta, Canada, down to our refineries in the gulf coast region. As you can see, it is this blue line laid out on the chart. Right next to it we have this red line. This is the Keystone Pipeline. I will take a minute to talk about that, because I think it is important in the context of what we are trying to do with Keystone XL.

Prior to being elected to the Senate, I served the State of North Dakota for 10 years as Governor. During that time, we worked with many companies to develop pipeline infrastructure in North Dakota as we produced more and more oil for this Nation, but we also worked with our neighbors from the North who provide oil to our country as well, in fact 2.2 million barrels a day, to move that product safely into our country.

The Keystone Pipeline, built by TransCanada, as you can see, tracks from Alberta, Canada, all the way down to Patoka, IL. So it is similar in that it brings Canadian crude into our refineries here in the United States, which is refined and reduces our dependence on other sources of oil. About 590,000 barrels a day flow through the Keystone Pipeline right now. So when we talk about the Keystone XL project, we are not talking about something which hasn't been done before. In fact, we just got done permitting this pipeline, which is almost identical, bringing oil from roughly the same place in Canada down to refineries into the United States. That has already been approved by EPA and the Department of State. It went through the requisite NEPA and study processes, it went through the proper processes with the Department of State, and it has been approved, 590,000 barrels a day coming into our country to reduce our dependence on oil from places such as the Middle East and Venezuela right now. So when we talk about Keystone XL, we are not talking about doing anything we haven't already done.

This pipeline--which would run a little bit to the west--again roughly starts up about the same place, Alberta, Canada, comes down further than the existing Keystone Pipeline down to our refineries. It is important to know that this isn't just about moving crude oil from Canada to the United States. This is also about moving oil within the United States.

In this part of our country, in North Dakota and in Montana, we are producing a tremendous amount of oil. My home State of North Dakota today is closing in on oil production of 500,000 barrels of oil a day. We will put 100,000 barrels a day of crude oil, such as sweet crude, into this pipeline as well. So it is not just about moving Canadian oil in America, it is about moving oil within our country, production from the Bakken region in the Williston Basin, down to our refineries.

Also, you will notice that the pipeline comes down to Cushing, OK. Right now we have a backlog of oil in Cushing, OK, and this pipeline will move oil from Cushing down to the refineries in Texas and Louisiana. So it helps solve bottleneck issues, moving oil in our country, which will help reduce prices to consumers as you eliminate some of these bottlenecks and price disparities.

Again I go back to the point of my being here today, talking about this legislation, which is solutions-oriented legislation, problem-solving legislation. What it does is it creates jobs, it reduces our dependence on Middle East oil, and again it provides better environmental stewardship. So when I say it is solutions oriented, what do I mean by that? The issue, as I think most people who follow this issue will recall, the concern or the problem was in the Sandhills region of western Nebraska. Concern had been expressed about going through the Sandhills of Nebraska. That is an area where we have the Ogallala aquifer, and there was concern there that there might be an issue should there be any kind of breach in the pipeline. So that was the issue.

However, the State of Nebraska recently had a special session. In that special session, they said, Hey, we will work to reroute the project to eastern Nebraska, similar to the pipeline that already exists. That eliminates the problem. Now we don't have an issue anymore in the Sandhills area of Nebraska.

The legislation we have written and that has now been incorporated into the House bill takes that very solution and incorporates it into the legislation. It says the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality can work with EPA and the State Department to reroute the project in Nebraska so there is no longer an issue. We solve the problem. It is problem-solving legislation.

We say as to the entire project that the administration, with State, the EPA, and so forth, has to make a decision on whether to approve the project within 60 days. Is it in our national interest? They have to make that decision within 60 days so the project can get started and we can start creating those construction jobs. But as to Nebraska, they are not bound by the 60 days. They have the time they need to incorporate the solution from the State's special session.

All we are saying is this project has been studied for 3 years. It has been studied for 3 years already. It has gone through the NEPA process. It has gone through the full EIS. State was ready to make a decision. It got held up because of Nebraska, and we specifically addressed that problem. Now it is time to go forward. That is why this is problem-solving legislation.

Again, this is about creating jobs. This is about reducing our dependence on Middle East oil. We absolutely address the issue of Nebraska. We do not set a 60-day time limit on it. As to the rest of the project, we can get started.

Let's talk about who supports the project. The Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, has talked to our President and said, look, our greatest ally is Canada. Canada says, this is a very important project for Canada. This is about producing our energy resources in Canada. This is about jobs and economic opportunity in Canada.

Let's join with our best ally and together create jobs and produce energy we can count on.

The issue has been brought up about environmental stewardship. For those who say we have some concerns about producing oil in the oil sands region of Canada, I submit Canada is doing what we are doing. North Dakota all the time is improving their technology in order to improve their environmental stewardship. For example, going to in situ mining rather than for excavation for things such as producing the oil sands.

The point we have to understand that is very important is, if the pipeline doesn't go this way, if the pipeline doesn't go south, it is going to go west. If this product does not come to the United States, this 700,000 barrels, it is going to the west coast of Canada, where it will be loaded on ships and it will go to China.

We have a choice to make. Do we want to reduce our dependence on oil from the Middle East and from Venezuela and other parts of the world where we have real security issues? Do we want to increase the relationship and the economic ties with our best ally in the world or do we want 700,000 barrels a day of Canadian oil going to China instead?

By the way, let's talk about the environmental stewardship. That means we have to haul it over there on oil tankers. We have to continue to bring our product in on oil tankers, so we have higher emissions instead of lower emissions. Instead of that oil being refined in the cleanest refineries in the world, which we have, it is going to be refined in refineries in China, which have much higher emissions.

Again, the whole focus of the legislation--I authored the bill. The whole focus in writing this bill was to say: How do we solve the problem? How do we deal with the concerns? How do we make sure we are being fair to people but that we move forward with real job creation, with producing more energy to increase our energy independence with our good friend and neighbor, our strongest ally--Canada? How do we continue to do more in terms of private investment, deploying technologies, creating better environmental stewardship? It is about problem-solving legislation.

We can see we have not only the U.S. Chamber of Commerce now supporting this legislation, because they want to see job creation, but we have all the large building and trade unions supporting it as well--AFL-CIO, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Labors International Union of North America, United Association, International Union of Operating Engineers.

It is America's workers who are clamoring for the expedited approval of this important project. We can't wait.

Mark Ayers, president, Building & Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO:

The Keystone Pipeline project will offer working men and women a real chance to earn a good wage and support their families in this difficult economic climate.

James P. Hoffa, International Brotherhood of Teamsters:

At a time when jobs are the top global priority, the Keystone Project will put thousands back to work and have ripple benefits throughout the North American economy. Our members look forward to being part of this historic project and pledge to deliver the highest quality work to make it a success.

President Edwin D. Hill, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. The list goes on.

As I said, this project has been studied for 3 years. We have already built the sister project. We have gone through that whole process. This has been studied for 3 years already.

How much will this project cost the American taxpayer? This is a $7 billion investment, but it is private investment. It is private investment that stimulates job creation. Not only will it not cost the American taxpayer one dime, The Perryman Group from Waco, TX, estimates it will create hundreds of millions of dollars in local and State revenues.

Our country faces some real challenges. One of those challenges is we have to get people back to work. We have 8.6 percent unemployment. We have 13.3 million people looking for work. We need to get them back to work. So government needs to create the legal, tax, and regulatory environment that stimulates private investment and gets people back to work. This legislation, this project, helps do that.

We have a deficit and a debt--a deficit of about $1.3 trillion, a debt that is now $15 trillion. When our President took office, our debt was $10 trillion. The national debt was $10 trillion. Today it is $15 trillion.

We have to get a grip on our spending. We have to start finding savings, but at the same time we have to grow this economy. We have to get private investment going and grow this economy. That growth in revenues and controlling our spending is what will reduce the deficit and the debt.

You know what, we have to do more to reduce our energy dependence on places such as the Middle East and Venezuela, where we have real challenges. This is the kind of project that can do it. I submit we need to move forward. This body has the opportunity to truly empower the kind of investment we need to move our economy forward, to create greater energy independence, and to help Americans get back to work. That is exactly what they want. I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source