To Approve the Keystone XL Pipeline

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I would like to take a few minutes to talk about the legislation we are considering regarding the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline.

As with too many controversial issues, we have lost track of the facts and the basic process for moving a project such as this one forward. So let's be clear. The legislation we are voting on today isn't just a bill to say yes or no to the Keystone Pipeline. This is legislation that would have us skip the established process for determining whether a major infrastructure project, with potential impact to millions of Americans, our economy, and our environment, should be approved. We are still in the middle of that process. But if this bill passes, it would mean we are bypassing all the scientists and engineers and experts who are evaluating the proposal. It would put an arbitrary, manufactured timeline on a project whose evaluation is incomplete and would short-circuit the process for the public to weigh in on this project.

Regardless of how different Members feel about this, we should all agree that this is no way the U.S. Government ought to approve a project of this scope. So that is one reason I will be voting against this legislation. When it comes to protecting our environment, we should rely on facts, patience, and a fair process.

There is no denying that the proposed Keystone Pipeline project has become larger than the sum of its parts. I understand the desire of my colleagues to expedite the projects they support, and I understand cutting through redtape to get things done. But when we are considering a project that could have significant impacts on our economy and our environment, making a decision before we have all the facts could be reckless and it could be dangerous.

The Keystone Pipeline proposal is a great example of why our process for evaluating the potential consequences of projects such as this one is not only important, it is absolutely necessary. We simply cannot put expediency ahead of scientific facts regarding climate change because as a country we have done that for far too long and now we are paying the price.

Earlier this year, as chair of the Budget Committee, I held a hearing on the impact of climate change on our country. We heard testimony from business leaders, from environmental experts, from industry leaders, and even from military officials. Their message was clear: The consequences of climate change are not hypothetical and they are not exaggerated. The impacts of human activity on our planet are real, they are significant, and they are happening right now.

The Federal Government, for example, spent three times more on disaster relief in the past decade than it did in the previous decade. If we do nothing, continued climate change will result in more frequent and more intense episodes of extreme weather, just as we saw with Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy.

The U.S. Department of Transportation today sends about $22 billion a year to State and local governments just to help them keep their existing transportation infrastructure in good repair. But hotter temperatures and more frequent flooding will wash out roads and will put added stress on bridge supports and public transit systems and will require substantial additional Federal investment.

We know an uptick in temperature and heat waves will reduce annual yields of major crops and cause more livestock deaths. It will hurt farmers and agribusinesses, cause consumer food prices to rise, and really create a ripple effect that will increase costs to U.S. taxpayers.

Our military experts say that climate change will act as a catalyst for instability and conflict around the world, creating additional threats to our country and adding to the cost of protecting our Nation's interests.

So, Mr. President, with all we already know about the impacts of climate change, how can we possibly move this project forward before we have a thorough understanding of the environmental impacts that will result from building the Keystone Pipeline? How can we force the decision that could very possibly make the impact of climate change even worse?

As a Senator from the State of Washington, I am very proud of my work to protect the environment, and I am proud of my State's leadership in combating climate change. Even though the Keystone Pipeline will not run through my State, Washingtonians know well that the pipeline's impacts could quickly reach our communities, from Seattle to Spokane.

So I come to the floor today to oppose this legislation, and I will continue to oppose any efforts in Congress that ignore or brush aside the environmental consequences of our actions. For far too long we have put short-term interests ahead of our environment and long-term realities, and that has to stop.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source