Nomination of Leon Rodriguez to be Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

s. MURKOWSKI. I appreciate that my friend and colleague from Wyoming is helping to lead this discussion about the Keystone XL Pipeline and really to encourage the Senate to move on it, to do something on this rather than just talk about it.

We are sitting here Tuesday afternoon. We had a series of votes on judges here this morning, and it looks like we are going to have some more this week. But from the view of so many around this country who are worried about jobs, worried about the economy, worried about what is happening with the IRS, with the VA--and not to mention what has happened on the world scene--it looks like we are going to have yet another unproductive week in the Senate.

Since we are here and we have time, I can't think of a better time on a better issue to take up than this Keystone XL Pipeline.

The bill that we are asking to be brought up is Senate bill S. 2280. It was introduced by our colleague from North Dakota, Senator Hoeven. He introduced it on May 1.

It was placed on the legislative calendar a few days later. It has 55 cosponsors. When we talk about bipartisan issues and initiatives within the Senate, 55 is a very good number. It includes 11 Democrats, including the chair of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

We are well behind the House of Representatives, though, on this initiative. They passed a Keystone bill over 1 year ago, but we have been working in the energy committee. We had a Keystone bill that was reported out of the energy committee just last week.

We passed an original bill on a bipartisan basis. It has not yet been filed, but it is virtually identical to Senator Hoeven's bill, which we are discussing today.

But I did vote. I know my colleague from Wyoming and I know the Presiding Officer voted for Senator Landrieu's original bill. I did so because I think it is good policy to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline. I committed at that hearing, and I certainly commit now, that I am going to do everything I can to help advance this initiative. If and when her bill is placed on the calendar, I intend to support that as well.

But the problem that we have--and it should be no surprise to most--is no matter how many Keystone bills are added to the calendar, it appears that the majority leader is going to ignore them. It doesn't matter how long Keystone has been under review, it doesn't matter how many new jobs will be created, and it doesn't matter that the delays are political and not substantive.

The fact of the matter is we cannot get to that point where we can take up this important initiative. The majority leader could have offered us a vote on Senator Hoeven's bill at any point over these past 6 weeks, but he has chosen not to.

It seems very clear to me that he has no intention of moving to it, especially if we just kind of sit back on this and don't push. It may be that is the will of some in this body--that they don't want us to do anything, they don't want us to push forward. But I think that is contrary to the will, to the wish of 56 Members of this Chamber, and it is contrary to our national interests.

It is interesting to note Democrats were not always opposed to importing crude oil from Canada, as they would appear today. Back in 1970 the Nixon administration announced that it would place a quota on Canadian oil imports, and it was none other than Senator Ted Kennedy who led the fight against this decision.

Senator Kennedy said in a Senate hearing in March of 1970:

The reason why Canadian oil has never been restricted in the past is obvious. Canadian oil is as militarily and politically secure as our own and thus there can be no national security justification for limiting its importation.

Those were pretty telling words back then, and I think they still hold true today. It wasn't only Ted Kennedy. There were other Democrats who opposed the Nixon administration's restriction on trade with Canada: Senator Proxmire of Wisconsin and Senator McIntyre of New Hampshire.

I think we have had such an opportunity on this floor to debate the merits of the Keystone XL Pipeline and to debate not only how many good-paying jobs it can bring to us but how it can help this Nation and Canada as we work to promote our North American energy independence.

Our energy partnership with Canada has taken decades to develop. It has had some rocky times, but all good and worthy relationships take a little bit of work to maintain.

So if the Obama administration is unwilling to do the hard work of diplomacy and make this remarkably easy decision--approving a job-creating and a security-enhancing pipeline--then I think it is time for Congress to act. That is why a few of us have gathered here today to move this issue forward, to do more than just talking about it, but to get the Senate to the point where we might actually have an opportunity to vote on it and do some good for this country.

So we are sitting here waiting. We have an opportunity to do it, and I think we should end the delay. I think we should move forward with this bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source