Caucus the chairman of the finance committee somebody that certainly understands tax policy and fiscal policy for this country extremely well. And this legislation that were considering is a jobs bill. Its about energy. Its about jobs. Its about Economic Growth. Its about National Security. But for somebody like the senator from utah whos working on reforming our tax code and how we can stimulate Economic Growth in this country id like to turn to him here right at the outset and say as somebody that truly understands how our economy works and how we have to build a Good Business climate in this country and we have to empower the development of of infrastructure roads and rail, pipelines and transmission lines, as part of building an Energy Policy that will truly make this energy this Nation Energy secure. Id like to turn to him and ask him if he would take a few minutes and address not only this project on its on the broad basis of its merits but particularly some of the economic aspects that are so important when were talking about growing our economy and putting our people in this country to work in good jobs. Mr. Hatch mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from utah. Mr. Hatch mr. President , i want to thank my distinguished colleague for leading this fight fight. He has been leading it for years now. Its such a nobrainer its amazing to me that we even have to go through this again. But i want to thank him for yielding to me and id like to associate myself with many of the persuasive arguments that have been made here by my colleagues both democrat and republican urging the speedy passage of this legislation. To me the decision to approve this pipeline is an obvious one for a host of reasons. It will support more than 42,000 goodpaying jobs. I didnt quite get what the assistant minority leader was saying here today on how few jobs it creates. It actually will support more than 42,000 goodpaying jobs during its construction phase. It will contribute more than 3. 4 billion to our gross domestic product. It will aid in the goal of north American Energy independence. And as the state departments Environmental Impact statement found, building the keystone x. L. Pipeline will actually be better for the environment than not building it. The Energy Resources that the canadians produce will reach the market regardless of whether this pipeline is built and keystone x. L. Is by far the safest, the cleanest and the most efficient means of doing so so. Why are there arguments against it, my gosh, other than phony environmental arguments . Mr. President , that was the state department controlled by them. Mr. President , as a commonsense bipartisan jobs and infrastructure measure this bill is exactly the source the sort of legislation that the senate should be considering as its first order of business in this new congress. But it should not have to be. The story here is about more than a single pipeline, no matter how many jobs its construction will create no matter how important it is for our Energy Independence and no matter how environmentally sound it is. This is a story about a regulatory process that is clearly broken. This is a story about special interests manipulating the bureaucracy to muck up the process that should be very simple and uncontroversial. And this is a story about just one of many examples of tragically missed opportunities to create goodpaying jobs and provide relief for Household Budgets across the country. Mr. President , the application for approval of the keystone x. L. Pipeline was first filed in september of 2008, more than six years ago. United states senators have served more than a full term during that particular time. Children born after the application was filed are now in first grade. The notion that any Infrastructure Project should be held up for such a long period is disturbing. Not just to me but i think to anybody who carefully looks at this. But the delay of keystone x. L. Is even worse given the strong and welldocumented economic and environmental case for the pipeline. Keystone is the sort of a project that should have been quickly and easily approved for construction. But for some committed environmentalists inside and outside the Obama Administration administration, commonsense and balanced consideration of the facts no longer matter. Instead, to them, the simple pipeline has become a political symbol. Regardless of what the science tells us. And they have directed their ample energies at throwing up every procedural roadblock imaginable to the approval of the pipeline. As a result, this project has endured delay after delay after delay. Mr. President , over the past few years, the American People have rightly developed the impression that washington is broken. There can be no better example of the consequence of this dysfunction than the holdup of the keystone x. L. Pipeline sitting in bureaucratic purgatory. When a project such as this, which is good for jobs good for families good for families budgets, gets dogged down in the Obama Administrations red tape it is absolutely the responsibility of the congress to act. Unfortunately for years, the senate became a place where good ideas, like approving keystone x. L. Came to die where control of the calendar and the amendment process prevented the consideration of so many good bipartisan issues and ideas. Not only was the Administration Administration the administrative process broken but the senate was also paralyzed and unable to step in and fix it. Mr. President , by taking up this important bill as our first matter of consideration in this new congress, we are taking steps to restore the senate to the great legislative body it was meant to be. It is meant to be. The place where senators work across the aisle to meet the needs of the American People. By coming together to propose a commonsense solution to get back on track this project that has become such a symbol of whats wrong with washington my friends from north dakota and West Virginia are demonstrating exactly the sort of thoughtful inclusive and bipartisan leadership that the American People have been demanding as theyve watched this greatest deliberative body in the world become the laughingstock of the world because we havent gotten very much done. We havent gotten very much done because of the way its been run over the last number of years. It is my sincere hope that we move quickly and desperately and deliberately to approve this measure and that we soon begin considering serious Regulatory Reform to prevent the sort of abuses that we have seen bedevil the keystone x. L. Project. The American People deserve an efficient and effective regulatory process that works for them and its time for the senate to deliver. Having said these few words, i want to personally thank my distinguished colleagues from north dakota and my colleagues from the West Virginia for the leadership that theyve provided on this issue. Senator hoeven is a former governor. He knows what hes talking about. Hes one of the most reasonable, decent, honorable people in this body. He has shown a great willingness to work with both sides. He has continued to fight for this even though its been uphill the last six years better than six years. Hes continued to fight for it because its right. Its the right thing to do. And its in our best interest to do it and to do it now. Thank you mr. President. I yield the floor. Mr. Hoeven mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from north dakota. Mr. Hoeven id like to thank the distinguished senator from utah for his leadership both today on this floor but for many years. And pick up on a point that he emphasized and did so very eloquently. And hes in a unique position to comment on it and thats the importance of having this open amendment process having regular order on the senate floor, allowing senators to republican and democrat alike to come forward bring their ideas forward, bring their amendments forward, have this discussion and do it in an open way. And, you know, the whole effort here is to produce good Energy Legislation that will help this country move forward but also to foster bipartisanship to foster bipartisanship on this bill and other legislation so that we can get the work done that this body needs to get done on behalf of the American People. Thats what this is all about. This is about getting the work done for the American People on the important issues that our country faces. And thats why this bill is s. 1. Not just because its Important Energy infrastructure legislation, not just because we need to have this debate on energy, not just because we need to advance legislation to help build our Energy Future but because it is truly an effort to get this body working in a bipartisan way on this and other important issues for the American People. And thats what the American People want. They want us to get the job done. And so again i want to thank the senator from utah for bringing out that important fact and discussing why it is so important that we approach legislation in that way. And id like to turn to my good friend the . Are senator from friend the senior senator from the great state of arkansas, somebody who really i think has not only a good understanding of how our economy works what needs to be done somebody who has good relationships on both sides of the aisle which is so important as we try to build support for this and other legislation but somebody whose state is directly affected, mr. President by this project. And i know that youll agree with me that its very important on behalf of the state of arkansas that we move forward with the keystone x. L. Pipeline project. I think some a very High Percentage of the pipe that goes into this project about a 1,200milelong project, is actually manufactured and made in arkansas. So heres clear benefit for workers Manufacturing Industry and workers in the state of arkansas that correlates directly to this project and to this legislation. And so id like to turn to the senator the senior senator from arkansas and ask him about that and say tell us about the importance of this project in terms of what it means to the great state of arkansas. Mr. Boozman mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from arkansas. Mr. Boozman mr. President , it is a pleasure to have the opportunity to talk about the Keystone Pipeline. I also want to thank the senator from north dakota for literally his tireless efforts his leadership on behalf of getting the Keystone Pipeline project moving. For the past six years ive urged the administration to approve the project. Ive voted for legislation to speed up the pipeline construction. This pipeline makes sense for job creation and the future of our Nations Energy supply. In a recent email survey sent to more than 30,000 arkansans i asked what issues the new majority in the senate should focus on in the 114th congress. Participants told me that one of their Top Priorities is the an alloftheabove Energy Policy that addresses current and future energy needs. The senate has an opportunity to pass legislation that is a commonsense plan to improve our Nations Energy supply by approving the keystone x. L. Pipeline. Tapping into these Canadian Oil Sands will offer us a reliable source of energy from one of our strongest allies and trading partners. This is good news as we work to reduce our dependence on oil from regions of the world that are hostile towards our country and its good news for arkansas. Heres why. Approval of the Infrastructure Projects means jobs. This is one reason it has the support of both parties. Organized labor has been very vocal in support of the pipeline. Unions understand that this Infrastructure Project will create wellpaying jobs for skilled laborers and it will do so at no expense to the taxpayers. Its not only just unions, certainly businesses are supportive of the pipeline too as well as an overwhelming majority of americans. Last month as the senator from north dakota alluded to, i toured the wellton tubular country, the little locks company hired to build hundreds of miles of pipeline for it is project. The companys officers estimated that 150 jobs will be created just to load the pipe on the rail cars for shipment when the project gets the green light finally. The Economic Impact has wide impact on arkansas. We have a Company Making steel for the pipeline and theres a strict he willdown impact a trickledown impact throughout the state. A caterpillar employee wrote to me about the importance of this project to his job because of its impact to his livelihood. The Keystone Pipeline would be a huge boost to us, he wrote. Once not the infrastructure will provide a safe and reliable supply of energy. Currently this oil is transported from canada to refineries by rail and truck. A new modern pipeline poses less risk to the environment than these current modes of transportation. The project will help maintain lower fuel prices which is good for all americans. At every hurdle, using science and commonsense this project gets the green light. Last week nebraskas Supreme Court upheld the states law approval a route for the pipeline through the state. Time and again this project passes the test but the president has threatened to veto the bill. This isnt surprising considering the administration has spent more than six years analyzing this and punting a decision down the road until further studies have been conducted. The pipeline is being studied literally to death. Its ready to go. And yet the president is still looking for ways to stop it. The American People deserve this affordable energy. They deserve wellpaying jobs. Both can be accomplished by building the Keystone Pipeline. And again, i want to thank the senator from north dakota for his tireless efforts in the past six years trying to get this project off the ground, and the good news is i think weve made real progress. I yield the floor. Mr. Hoeven mr. President . Id like to thank the senator and i will point out this is another state that will benefit from this project. This is a state far removed from the route of the project. As i pointed out in earlier debate on this floor all of the states on the route from montana to texas have approved the project, all of them. Theyve all approved it. The only entity Still Holding up the approval of the keystone x. L. Pipeline is the federal government the Obama Administration. All the states have approved it. Those states on the route will realize tremendous benefits from the construction and the construction dollars, from the hundreds of millions of dollars that they will receive in tax revenues payment in lieu of taxes at the state and local level, they will receive tremendous benefit from this project, not to mention, of course, the benefit that the whole country receives as we become more Energy Independent by working with canada to truly achieve north American Energy security. But heres a state arkansas, far removed from the route of the pipeline. I dont think the oil will actually go to any of the i dont know about refineries in arkansas. I dont think that there are refineries it will go to. Like it will go to refineries in states like louisiana and texas and so forth. But even still even still arkansas will benefit directly from this project because they manufacture much of the pipe that goes into the project and those are good manufacturing jobs that not only benefits those workers but then you have the secondary impacts as well. So again i want to thank the senator from arkansas for coming down to the floor today and just taking a few minutes to point that out and well continue over the next several weeks to talk about the benefits in other states as well. Again, i want to thank the good senator from arkansas. At this time even though i have floor time reserved until about 11 15 or a little more, i would like to actually stop for a minute and allow the the senator from washington to talk about her views on it. I know that she is not a of course i work with her on the Energy Committee. She is our Ranking Member. I enjoy and appreciate working with her. But i understand she shares different views in this case. So i would ask unanimous consent that her time for the next ten to 15 minutes that she needs not be counted against my time, that i would be willing to defer so that she could speak at this time. The presiding officer without objection. Ms. Cantwell thank you mr. President. I thank the senator from north dakota. I know were going to be going back and forth on this issue and that we have speakers coming later this morning and were going to have time divided but i appreciate the senator of north dakota allowing us to join in the debate this morning and make a few mountains. And i do want to say i appreciate the senator from north dakotas hard work on the Energy Committee in general and i look forward to working with him on many Energy Policies. He and i have worked together on a couple of different agricultural issues, and i certainly appreciate his due diligence. But needless to say i dont agree with the process of moving forward with this motion to proceed to the Keystone Pipeline bill. Many of my colleagues here are going to be coming down, talking about the issues. Two of my colleagues including the senators from utah and arkansas along with the senator of north dakota, brought up a couple of different points, but in my mind, they are talking about a 19th century Energy Policy in fossil fuel instead of us focusing on what should be a 21st century Energy Policy for our country. So its really unfortunate that s. 1 as people are heralding it as the new congress, to me, you know i want us to be focusing on a Broader Energy debate in congress than what is a very narrow specific special interest measure for a pipeline that really didnt go through the proper channels of a permitting process and because of that is flawed and this process continues more today with people saying lets just give it more special interest attention and approve it. I believe that america should be a leader in Energy Policy and that our job creation is dependent upon that Energy Policy for the future, and we want to see america be a leader in this. I applaud the fact that the president did a deal with the chinese that u. S. And china entered into a Clean Energy Strategy working together. We are over 60 of the energy consumption, and if the two countries Work Together on a Clean Energy Strategy, i guarantee you that will be Good Business for the u. S. Economy. In fact, i read a statistic that Something Like 50 of all energy is going to be consumed by the buildings in china the growth in Building Development and the fact that they dont have Good Building standards. So there is a lot to do on Energy Efficiency that will grow u. S. Jobs and help us, and thats why we would rather see us focusing on some of the Energy Policies that we did in 2005 and 2007. Those things unleashed huge opportunities for american jobs and huge opportunities for American Consumers to get a better deal and not be subject to price spikes. The 2007 bill had fuel efficiency standards in it and laid the foundation for the growth in the hybrid and electric car industry and has added over 263,000 jobs in the last five years. Thats the kind of smart policy we should be pursuing. We also had energy bills that made investments in Clean Energy Tax credits something i was just talking to my colleague from utah saying we needed to move forward on the energy tax credits. If there is nothing else that we should be doing we should be doing that as s. 1 because the predictability and certainty that we would be giving to that industry would certainly unleash many jobs. So the 2005 and 2007 energy bills that we did in a bipartisan fashion helped foster an Energy Efficient economy and helped support 450,000 jobs, according to a 2011 Brookings Institute report. So these are examples of the types of things that weve done in the past that really have unleashed investment, really have grown jobs in the United States of america and they are important milestones in the type of clarity that congress can give to the private sector to spur growth in development. Well i can guarantee you that this is just the opposite of that. This is about a special interest deal and overriding a process including the white house process and local government process that is so essential. So two examples of what we should be doing instead. As i said, the energy tax credits which have been delayed and as my colleague from oregon pointed out at the end of last year. We basically authorized them for about two more months, and that was about all the certainty we gave the industry. Mckenzie report has said that the cost for retrofitting buildings and Energy Efficiency would help employ 900,000 people over the next decade, that the Wind Energy Tax credit would employ 54,000 people, and there are other issues about modernizing our grid and new technology storage. There is also very, very important work to be done in the manufacturing sector, and that is to help unleash innovation by making sure that we set standards on improving efficiency and focusing on lightweight materials for both automobiles and aviation. We have seen huge job growth in the Pacific Northwest because we were able to transform aerospace into lighter weight materials and were also working on lighter weight im sorry. More fuelefficient airplane fuel in a biojet fuel. So all of these things mean we have to get the r d right, we have to get the tax credits right and we need to help protect consumers from spiking energy prices. This is the evolution. I dont think anybody in america thinks that were going to hold onto a 19th century fossil fuel economy forever. The question is whether congress is going to spend its time moving forward on a 21st century plan that gives the predictability and certainty to unleash that leadership and capture the opportunities in developing markets around the globe or whether were going to hold onto the last element of fossil fuel forever and leave our constituents more at risk. But i would like to take a few minutes and talk about this process that my colleagues are trying to describe here as why we need to hurry because i can guarantee you thats what people have been trying to do all along. Hurry this along for a special interest. I dont believe that thats good for the American People, and i dont think that its good for this process. If you think about where we have been this process is about people who are trying to push a route through no matter what the circumstances. Every state people are saying have approved this process. Well i could guarantee you there is a lot of people in nebraska and a lot of people in south dakota that dont agree with that, and they are very concerned about the Public Interest. Unfortunately, in the case of the x. L. Project landowners and ranchers affected by the pipeline did not feel that they were afforded equal opportunity before the law. In their view, the process was set up to benefit a special interest the transcanada corporation. On three separate occasions beginning in 2011, the Nebraska Legislature passed carveouts to circumvent the role of the Public Service commission to approve the Keystone Pipeline. If this was such a great deal, why cant it go through the normal process like in every other state of a transportation and Utilities Commission on siting. Why do you have to take the Public Interest out of it . The first carveout included a Major Oil Pipeline siting act of 2011. So this bill laid out the rules that the Public Service commission determined whether a new pipeline project was in the Public Interest. So in making this decision, the legislature required that the Commission Consider a criteria. Eight criteria. Among them, the Environmental Impact of water and wildlife and vegetation the economic and social impacts the alternative routes, the impacts to future development in the pipelines proposal and the views of counties and cities. Okay that all sounds great. Thats what the Legislature Said they should consider. But the Legislature Also required the commission to hold public hearings and have public comments. Were still on the right track and importantly require the commission to establish a process of appealing the decision that any aggrieved party could have under the Due Process Rights of the administrative procedures act. Heres the punch line. Tucked away in that nebraska legislation was a special interest carveout that exempted Transcanada Keystone from having to comply with the Public Service commission process. So specifically the legislation stated quote shall not apply to any Major Oil Pipeline that has submitted an application to the u. S. Department of state pursuant to executive order 1337 prior to the Effective Date of this act. End quote. There was only one company that qualified for this special interest exemption at the time of that legislation and that was transcanada. So you got it. The legislature basically exempted them from that process even though they were stating that these are the things that you should go through so at the very time the legislature created new rules for due process on the pipeline, it exempted them from those rules. So i dont understand why transcanada cant play by the rules, but i guarantee you congress doesnt have to join in and make s. 1 a special interest bill along with a congress that seems more bent on rolling back rules of doddfrank. They should make sure everyone plays by the rules. During this same legislative session, the Nebraska Legislature also passed the oil Pipeline Route certification act. This bill provided keystone x. L. With an expedited review process by the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality and gave them the Sole Authority to approve the project resting with the governor. Unfortunately for the legislature and for transcanada these carveouts quickly became irrelevant because president obama denied the application in 2012, and that in due part to the fact that congress had decided to try to intervene in the matter. Thats when Congress Said this is important and we should go ahead and do this. And im going to get into more detail on that in a second, but this is important to understand because the initial nebraska legislation was so narrowly tailored, it was designed to benefit Transcanada Pipeline and its pending date of enactment. So what happened next . The legislature went back to the drawing board and created a third new special carveout for keystone x. L. Pipeline. The following the day following the president s denial of transcanadas application the new bill was introduced in the Nebraska Legislature and yet followed another path around the existing due process afforded to citizens in that state. The legislation allowed the company to choose whether to go through a former process with the Public Service commission or seek expedited review with the governor. I am sure that a lot of u. S. Companies would love to have that opportunity. These are people, u. S. Companies, that have to pay lawyers, go through environmental processes make sure all the issues are addressed. Im sure American Companies would love to know that any day of the week, they could just go past a Utility Commission and just get the governor to stamp approval on their project. Under this expedited approach, the legislature authorized the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality to independently conduct an Environmental Impact report. However, unlike the due process required by the Public Service commission this process required only token outreach to the public. There was just one public hearing in 2012. So this special process provided no recourse for aggrieved parties. There was no formal appeals process other than the courts, there was no administrative process with the ability for shakeholdors challenge the fact as a matter of record to base their formal appeal on and these are fundamental differences between an expedited consideration of the Governors Office and process requiring Public Interest determination by relevant decisionmakers at a commission. So i know my colleagues here would like to argue that somehow this has been a long, drawnout process. This has really been a process by one company constantly circumventing the rules on the books and trying to get a special deal for approval. You have to ask yourself why. Why do they want to proceed this way . Well i know my colleagues always like to talk about their neighbors, my neighbors in british columbia, theyre not so thrilled about tar sands pipeline activity. Theyre not interested in pit maybe thats they want to get the process through here in the United States. So i ask my colleagues, do you have confidence that the Public Interest was really taken into consideration, that you run over the interests of Property Rights owners on these issues, was the department of quality comprehensive . I can tell you one nebraska land. Er described it as quote an incomplete evaluation with the magnitude of the aquifer and now it is left in the hands of transcanada to do their own policing end quote. So another family who has been ranching there for five generations said the process left clearance with nowhere to landowners with nowhere to tern with concerns of erosion, or imminent domain. Another owner had this to say about the process in nebraska quote i feel it is not in the best interests of nebraska nor the nebraska to have our legislators crafting special interest legislation to meet the specific demands of an individual corporation. I couldnt agree with him more. Thats exactly what were trying to do here today. The same stakeholders in nebraska have also questioned the appearance of conflict associated with the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality report. Since it was prepared by a contractor who also worked for transcanada and exxon on different joint pipeline projects. So meanwhile a majority of the state Supreme Court 47 justices last week ruled that the legislature and governors actions were unconstitutional. The presiding officer the senator has consumed 15 minutes. Ms. Cantwell id ask for an additional two minutes just to wrap up. The presiding officer without objection. Ms. Cantwell i know my colleague would has already given me some time this morning and i certainly can come back and add more to the debate, but what i am outlining here is exactly how this process has circumvented the laws of this land and one more action by this body is exactly what this special Interest Company is seeking. If congress had passed and implemented this before when you tried to push the president of the United States into agreeing with this, this route would have been done and it would have been right through the aquifer that people are objecting to now and forced the company to then change its route. So i dont know why were being asked to push something through when we really should allow the state department to do its job. Ill have much more to say on this process and the circumventing of Public Interest about the devastating spill in kalamazoo, the fact that we dont know, all we need to know about tar sands cleanup of water to talk about the fact that midwest prices could be affected by this, there are many issues so i gladly debate this with my colleagues throughout the rest of this week and mr. President , i yield the floor. Mr. Hoeven mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from north dakota. Mr. Hoeven id like to resume my time for the colloquy. The presiding officer the senator is recognized. Mr. Hoeven i just want to take a minute to respond to couple of the points that my colleague on the Energy Committee just brought up in regard to both the process and also in regard to the timeline for approval of this project and then i want to turn too to my cosponsor the senator from West Virginia and get some of his input on the project and now were getting into the debate weve wanted from day one. I had the good fortune to serve as governor of the great state of north dakota and the good senator here on the floor with me from West Virginia at the same time was governor of his state of West Virginia. We worked together on many different issues, im a republican hes a democrat, and we found Common Ground on important issues as governors and we found Common Ground here and thats what this is all about. Thats what we want to have happen among our colleagues so that we can get this and other important legislation addressed and passed and help our country. And so i just before i turn to my colleague from West Virginia let me just touch briefly on a couple of points that the Ranking Member of our Energy Committee brought up just now. She said she opposes the project, i understand and respect her views but she talked about the length of time that the approval process takes, and what ive goit got to point out is weve been in this approval process now more than six years. More than six years. So when she talks about needing more time to get the project approved its hard to understand how were going to have a working functioning economy, how were going to get the private sector to invest the billions of dollars it takes this project alone the largest shovelready project thats ready to go, just under 8 billion, 7. 9 billion, and its been held up more than six years. America got into world war ii and won the war in less than six years. Building the hoover dam took less than six years. With if were going to create the kind of environment where we speculate slate investment by the private sector and get our economy growing and going and get people back to work we cant hold private investment up. Remember not one penny of federal money it will create jobs create hundreds of millions in tax revenue help us build our Energy Future, help us with National Security by being energy secure, all those things and here the federal government is held it up for more than six years. How can we argue theres any kind of process there that works in any kind of realistic or commonsense way when it been held up more than six years . And specifically as regards the state of north nebraska, in 2012 i put forward legislation which we passed in this body attached to the part holiday that required payroll tax holiday. We said you have to make a decision. At that time the project had been under review four years long enough, make your National Interest determination. Passed it with 7 votes so the president at that time said, well no, im not going to make a decision on the project now because of the what he perceived to be the problem with the route in nebraska. Remember, this project goes through states from montana through texas. Here it is. And also remember, its not just carrying canadian crude. It carries crude from my state of north dakota and the state of montana, light sweet bakken crude. Everybody forgets this moves domestic crude as well. And my state alone produces 1. 2 Million Barrels of oil a day and were moving 700,000 barrels a day on trains because we cant get enough pipelines. So here we want to put 100,000 barrels a day into this pipeline and weve been waiting for six years, putting more and more oil on rail cars, congestion on the rails cant move our ag products and weve been held up six years. But in 2012 we passed that bill, this body passed it and the house went to the president and he turned it down said the routing wasnt just right in nebraska. There had been objection in nebraska. Here you see the pipeline goes through nebraska, he said im not going to approve it at this point because theyve got to square it away in nebraska. So in nebraska the state legislature, the elected body of the people went to work with the governor, dave heineman, a good friend of mine, and the senator from West Virginia as well we served with governor dave heineman. The elected body of the people, the legislature went to work with the governor, they want through a long process they rerouted the pipeline to address any concerns regarding the Ogallala Aquifer and other concerns brought up, a long process, and approved it. Every state on the route has approved the project. Theyve all approved it. Theyve had six years to do it so it wasnt like they had to hurry. But theyve all approved it. Yet the federal government continues to hold it up and say oh, well we have concerns. Now, my esteemed colleague from washington 0 hoopoeses the project said she was concerned about the Supreme Court decision. Remember the Supreme Court decision came up because after the state of nebraska approved the project then opponents challenged it. Forced it into court. Went to the nebraska Supreme Court, the nebraska Supreme Court found in favor of the governor and the legislature for the state of north dakota. Excuse me, nebraska. For the state of nebraska. So they found in favor of the route and the state of nebraska said that that is as it should be. Okay. So thats all been covered at great length by the elected representatives of the state of nebraska and the Supreme Court of nebraska. How much more does this take . Furthermore, the point that my colleague was making was if we had rushed somehow this would have been a problem except if you look at the legislation we put right in the legislation in section 2 under the private property savings claws to make clause to make sure if there is an issue like that its addressed in the legislation so the concerned she has addressed is in the legislation and the reason its in there is because the good senator from montana also on the route senator tester wanted this provision in the bill. Also a democrat and showing the bipartisanship of the bill, he said lets make sure we take care of that so we put language in the bill to make the concerned addressed on the floor is addressed. Ill read it. Section 2 subsection e private property savings clause. Nothing in this act alters any federal, state or local process or condition in effect on the tate of enact to secure from private property to cross border facilities described in section a. So we tried to make sure and fourthhour, furthermore let me read judicial review. We also provide that section i wont read it but we provided for judicial review so if any of these issues are a concern, in addition to the language we put in to protect states rights you also have judicial review. I dont know how much more we can do to make sure that any and all concerns she just raised in regard to the process of the individual states is protected. And, again i make the case theyve all gone through Great Lengths to approve the gentlewoman and the project and were the only entity blocking it after more than six years is the federal government. And one other point id like briefly before turning to the senator from West Virginia and that is the good senator from washington talked about alternative Energy Sources and Renewable Energy sores sources and how we need to develop them and they create jobs and thats great. And this is a note on which ill turn to my cosponsor and the distinguished senator from West Virginia. Were for all of the above energy approach. But weve got to get over the idea that somehow theyre mutually exclusive. Because we go forward and build important infrastructure so that we can make sure that we dont have to import oil from opec or countries like venezuela or other parts of the world to ensure that we can be secure in energy that we can produce as much or more oil than we consume both with Domestic Production and canada, we need this infrastructure but that in no way precludes any development of any other source of energy. Theyre not mutually exclusive. So to say that we should be doing one and not the other how does that make sense . Lets do them both. Lets do them both. And on that note i want to turn to my colleague because hes ask anybody in this body particularly coming here as a governor hes somebody who not only is very bipartisan in his approach to all these issues but somebody that really has not only advocated for producing all of the above in terms of energy but somebody thats done it in his time as governor. So id turn to my colleague and say cant we do both, and isnt approval this part of doing it all . Mr. Manchin i want to thank the senator from north dakota, my friend for taking the lead on this and working with him so closely. And i really am excited about the process were in right now an open amendment process learning a lot debates a lot of good ideas come out before and when its all said and done we should have a better piece of legislation. This is not about pipelines. If this was about an x. L. Pipeline or any of the pipelines, we wouldnt have 100,000 of miles of pipelines in america already. Since l industrial revolution, we have not built all the pipelines that are needed to carry all the energy thats needed to run this country. So this is not about a pipeline. This is about basically the concerns we all have about Greenhouse Gas emissions and the development of the oil sands in canada. Nothing to do with the pipeline. And with that being said, we got to be very clear canada is going to develop the oil sands whether or not the keystone x. L. Pipeline is built. Thats a fact. And weve talked about this. The state department, our own state department in this great country of ours, the United States of america has conducted five environmental assessments of the Keystone Pipeline and has found and all of them that the project will not have a Significant Impact on the environment. Now, these are the things that we have to be cognizant of. The state Department Also found that the pipeline is unlikely to affect the rate of extraction in canadian oil development. That means that whatever we do here is not going to change the rate of development in the oil sands. So the state Department Also examined alternatives to the proposed x. L. Pipeline. These alternatives included what would happen if no action was taken at awvment all. Lets say we do nothing and nothing comes about with this pipeline. Likely the crude would be shipped either by rail or by tanker. And if that continued it would be considered no action if we take no action here and dont build this pipeline, for whatever reason, the Greenhouse Gas emissions which were all concerned about and our debate is about that really, will be between 28 to 42 higher if we do nothing. So those people who are concerned about Greenhouse Gas emissions should say well, okay why do we want to contribute to more . The pipeline decreases that. And if we dont do it, weve got 28 to 42 more emissions. Ive talked about this before our dependence on foreign. Ive said this many times. We all are entitled to our opinions and i think youre going too hear all of our opinions in the next couple of weeks much what were not entitled to is our own set of facts. Ive said this before and ill repeat it again and continue to repeat it. We buy as of the 2013 figures from the department of energy, e. I. A. , we the United States of america, buy 7 Million Barrels of crude oil a day. Whrornlgwhether you like it or not people buy it. Its what it takes for ow for our economy to run. 7 Million Barrels a day. We already buy 2. 5 Million Barrels from canada right now. Were already dependent on canada for 2. 5 Million Barrels a day. We also buy oil from other countries, and i think you ought to question why were buying oil from these other countries and especially when you look at venezuela, we buy 755,000 barrels day from venezuela and they are an authoritarian regime impoverishes its citizens. They violate their human rights and have put down their citizens. But were purchasing a product from them that they use the resources to continue this type of regime. The same here of 2013, we bolt 1. 3 million from saudi arabia. Now, i dont know about you but im going to question, the resources from that, are the proceeds from that oil that weve paid saudi arabia for was it used for the betterment of the United States of america . For our best interests . I have my doubts about that. We also buy over 40,000 barrels a day from russia. Dont need to tell but whats going on there. I think you all know that. The Keystone Pipeline would allow us to more safely import oil from a stable alirks one ally, one of our better trading partners. Our numberone trading partner is canada and it is the most stable regime, the best ally weve ever seen. The pipeline will have a final capacity of 800,000 barrels day. We can continue to produce energy in north america while stibblessing Global Supply as well as benefiting americans and a lice. In fact, last year one of obamas president obamas former National Security advisors one of the president s former National Security advisors retired marine general james jones told the Foreign Relations committee the international bullies who wish to use Energy Scarcity as a weapon against you all are watching intently. If we want to make mr. Putins day and strengthen his hand, we should reject the keystone. I repeat, if i would want to make mr. Putins day and strengthening his hand, we should reject this Keystone Pipeline. But if we want to gain an important mairve International Energy security, jobs, tax revenue and prosperity to advance our work on a spectrum of Energy Solutions then dont rely on carbon, it should be approved. So you got to decide which side youre on. Do you want to make mr. Putins day . Or do you want to find alternatives and use all the above and be less dependent on foreign oil . In addition to our Energy Independence and National Security interests this bill will also create thousands of jobs. I think weve talked about that. I hear the argument, well, yeah, but theyre not going to be permanent. We build a lot of infrastructure a lot of roads we have a lot of good construction jobs when were building the bridge. I dont know any permanent jobs after we build a road. But we have a lot of good construction highpaying jobs. And when you start looking at that the building and Construction Trade and the teamsters, the aflcio all of our friends friends working americans, the hardworking americans support this piece of legislation. They want these jobs. Our own state Department Says itll create about 42,000 jobs to construct the pipeline and thousands of other related jobs, so why dont we seize the opportunity . You know, now we talked about amendments. This is an open amendment process and a lot of my colleagues a lost my democratic colleagues on my side of the aisle, have some great ideas. Im going to work with them. I agree with my democratic friends, the Company Shipping oil through this pipeline should pay the excise tax to the oil spill trust fund. Theres no reason they should be exempted from these payments. Im going to work with them to put that amendment in. It is a good amendment. Itll strengthen the bill. Thats what the amendment process is will about. I agree also with my colleagues on the democratic side that any still needed in the future on this oil project should be bought from American Steel companies. Thats great. Lets promote more jobs in america. Buy American Steel. Dont let them dump on us. We should be supporting american jobs. I also agree with our friends that we shouldnt export any of our oil abroad. If that oil comes to america it should be semiconductorred to the same laws as all the it should be subjected to the same laws as all the oil that comes to america. I would like to think this process will strengthen a piece of legislation hopefully give us 6870 vietnams, that really gives a good piece phs legislation for the American People. Weve been promised an open amendment process and im so thankful for that which presents a valuable opportunity to accomplish some of our democratic priorities. Some of our democratic priorities that we talk about all the time on my side of the aisle. I believe the process will improve the bill and i hope that my colleagues will support this important piece of legislation and lets get the needed votes that we need to make sure that we move our country forward become less dependent on foreign oil and more selfsufficient and more secure as a nation. Thank you mr. President. Ms. Cantwell mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from washington. Ms. Cantwell i know we have several colleagues who want to come down here and speak on other issues this morning and then we have some members who want to join back in on this debate. But id like to make a few points and finish up my remarks from earlier an then yield to our colleagues. Mr. Hoeven mr. President . Id like to the presiding officer the senator from north dakota. Mr. Hoeven h. O. V. Id ask the speaker to yield for a purpose of a question. Id like to understand the time liefnlt i need about three four minutes to wrap up. I did relinquish 15 minutes for their side. So i would request three to four minutes to wrap up and then youd certainly be willing to turn the floor over to them. Ms. Cantwell go right ahead. Mr. Hoeven thank you mr. President. This is going ton an ongoing debate. I want to thank the senator from West Virginia. Im glad we are engaging in this debate. I think we should debate all aspectsspects of it, as we are and look forward to that continued effort. I do, though, want to wrap up on a point as to the Environmental Impact. We talked about a number of different aspects of this pipeline project. We talked about taking great care in the approval process to address all the issues at the state level. We talked about making sure that we put provisions in the bill to respect that state process. Thats been going on for more than six years and obviously now its time well past time for the federal government to move forward and make its decision. But, again back to that process. If the president continues to oppose this legislation which hes indicated that he has, that he would veto it because he has a process and he hasnt finished the process then he needs to demonstrate and finish the process. He indicated that he was holding out for the decision in nebraska. Wlg, the decisionwell the decision in nebraska has been completed. He needs to make a decision and he needs to tell us what he is going to make that decision. If he follows his process he needs to make a decision in favor of the project because as im pretty sure youre going to hear from some of the opponents of the project theyre saying, oh, well based on Environmental Issues, thats why he should turn it down. And i understand and respect their views on some of the Climate Change issues, and theyre certainly entitled to those opinions, but based on five studies three draft Environmental Impact statements and two final Environmental Impact statements done on this project, the Obama Administration state department in those Environmental Impact statements found this result. As a result of this project no significant Environmental Impact. And i understand that theyre going to spend a the love time talking about their views on Climate Change. Thats fine. I understand that. But there is a difference between opinion and theres a difference between the general discussion and the science of this project. Thats the finding by the Obama Administration. Well have more discussion on this issue. In addition to the fact that canada is working to reduce the Greenhouse Gas emissions from Oil Production in their country and in the oil sands since 19 90 on a perbarrel basis theyve reduced Greenhouse Gas emissions impiemissionsby about 28 and theyre continuing to do more. So theyre addressing the environmental issue by investing in technology that not only produces more energy but does it with better environmental stewardship. So instead of empowering that investment here we want to block it in thats not . Thats not the way. The way to do it is to encourage the investment that not only produces more energy but does it with better environmental stewardship. Again, i want that thank my colleague and fellow member of the Energy Committee for deferring so i could wrap up and i look forward to continuing this debate and discussion on this person issue and that on this important issue and with that i yield the floor. Ms. Cantwell mr. President , i will try to wrap up my opening remarks in this debate, too and then turn it over to our colleagues. Some are wanting to speak on this subject and on other matters this morning. I wanted to respond to a couple of things bases i because i know our colleagues keep thinking this is something we have to do and expedite. The reason why this project hasnt been approved to date is because they havent followed the process and people keep bringing up objections to that process. Along those lines id like to turn back to the fact that the congressional involvement in this matter during the backandforth with nebraska on the pipeline change when there is a sensitive area of the sandhill region. During 2008 until 2012, the u. S. State department was reviewing the transcanada initial application for the border and this required a National Interest determination by the president. Its worth reminding my colleagues that this was a process laid out by president bush. In the review of that process in their initial application the state department in 2011 announced that an alternative route through nebraska needed to be done to avoid uniquely sensitive terrain of the sandhill area. So the president in the state Department Said we need to go a different route. Okay . What happened next . You would think that most people would stop and listen and say oh my gosh, that is concern about this aquifer. Well thats not what happened. Thats not what happened. People came to congress and said, we should get the old route approved in the disastrous aquifer that provides 30 of the groundwater for irrigation through the United States. So at the same time the state department was telling the company weve got real concerns, you should go somewhere else, the company was coming here to congress trying to push the old route through. At the same time the state department was negotiating. So i will say to my colleagues if you think youre helping this process, youre hurting it. You are trying to take away the negotiating power of the state department to make sure that the environmental and sensitivity issues are addressed here. I know my colleague who i look forward to working with on the Energy Committee thinks that his legislation has protected something in the area of Property Rights, but let me be clear. This legislation ensures that the status quo in nebraska under the Supreme Court decision last week will stand. It simply affirms that the use of Eminent Domain on behalf of transcanada will be the law. And so were not doing anything in this legislation to protect them. So jamming keystone on to the temporary payroll tax cut bill was a mistake and so is this a mistake. Dont try to answer all of these questions that we think the state department should decide in our National Interest. The president should have the ability to say yes or no on this. So i would like the president to answer these questions as it relates to the tar sand oil in water, only because i had a chance to ask the commandant of the coast guard a year ago about this issue because were very concerned about the transport of tar sands out of our northwest area and the commandant at that time said we have no solution. No solution. When my colleague from michigan talked about the 1. 2 billion they had to spend on tar sand cleanup because it sank into kalamazoo river, i think these are issues that the state department has every right to raise with the company to get answers on. Just recently transcanada has been redoing some of its pipeline in other areas because it has also found that these the holes the wells on these projects were not sufficient. So the state department is telling them we want a third party validater. No other colleagues would lient lient like to interrupt that by saying we know best. I ask my colleagues not to urge the urgency of a process that has been failed from the beginning, that did not allow for the Public Interest to be adequately afforded their rights that basically is stopping the people who have objections now in south dakota from getting their day in court and a day in process. So i dont understand what the hurry is. I do want to hurry on Energy Policy but it has much more to do with getting the tax credits Clean Energy Incentives in place that will unleash thousands of more jobs and give predictability. That is the prerogative and the responsibility of congress to look at these tax incentives to establish economic incentives. It is not our job to site pipelines when the local process is not played out. At least dont stop the president from making sure these Environmental Issues are addressed. I know my colleague from massachusetts has been waiting and i know he has been a leader in the house of representatives prior to his time in the Senate Making sure that tar sands should pay into the Oil Spill Liability trust fund and i certainly the keystone bill remains on the agenda for the senate. Senators will consider amendments later in the day. The house is also back in session on tuesday your members will consider a resolution dealing with the terrorist attacks in paris. They will recess at 5 30 in preparation for president obamas state of the union address. As always, you can watch the house live on cspan and the senate live on cspan2. President obama delivers his state of the unit address, live coverage beginning at 8 p. M. Eastern, including the president s speech, the gop response delivered by jerk by ernie by jerry ernst and your reactions by phone. On cspan2, watch the speech and congressional reaction. The state of the unit address live on cspan cspan2, cspan radio and cspan. Org up next, the state of the state address from Washington State governor jay inslee. He talked about more funding for Early Childhood education and entrepreneurship in the state and a tax on carbon pollution. This is 25 minutes