Why do Democrats oppose the Keystone Pipeline?

Good day all. As the title of this post asks, why are Progressive Liberal Democrats so utterly opposed to the Keystone XL Pipeline? They would all say things like “It’s for the environment!” or “It’s about Global warming…err Climate Change!”

Actually, there is a much simpler reason why some Progressive Liberal Democrats are in opposition.

Pure greed.

It’s in their financial interests to stop the pipeline. They will deny this to their dying breath, but the disclosure statements tell another story. Here are some of the details from the Free Beacon:

Democrats who oppose the Keystone XL pipeline have thousands of dollars invested in direct competitors to the company looking to build the pipeline, public records show.

But, how can this be? It’s only those greedy evil Republicans that use their offices for financial gain! Who could possibly be doing this?

A recent environmental assessment by the State Department was seen as a step toward the pipeline’s approval, but Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va.) remains opposed to its construction. “In my view, there is now enough evidence to conclude that construction of this pipeline is not in America’s long-term interest,” Kaine said in a statement on the review.

The freshman Democrat has between $15,000 and $50,000 invested in Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, according to his most recent financial disclosure. Kinder Morgan is looking to build a pipeline that would directly compete with Keystone.

So, Senator Kaine stands to get rich(er) if the Keystone XL Pipeline is stopped? It has nothing to do with things like safety, the environment or jobs? Why am I not surprised? So what would happen if the pipeline were stopped?

Kinder Morgan is considering expanding its Canadian pipeline infrastructure with an expansion of the Trans Mountain Pipeline, which carries oil sands crude from Alberta to refineries and export terminals on Canada’s west coast. The expansion would boost Trans Mountain’s capacity to 890,000 barrels per day. Keystone, a project of energy company TransCanada, is expected to carry about 830,000 barrels per day if fully constructed. Observers have said a rejection of Keystone would be a boon for Kinder Morgan, since the Trans Mountain pipeline presents a viable alternative for exporting crude from Canadian oil sands.

So we have a lying hypocrite Progressive Liberal Democrat who’s only reason fro opposition to the Keystone XL Pipeline is financial. He wants to line his own pockets. I assume this is just a one off problem for the Progressive Liberal Democrats. Umm, no.

Another anti-Keystone Democrat, California Rep. Alan Lowenthal, has between $15,000 and $50,000 invested in Enbridge Energy Management, $1,000 to $15,000 in Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, and $15,000 to $50,000 in Kinder Morgan Management, which is a limited partner in and handles everyday management for the company’s Energy Partners subsidiary. Lowenthal has been less outspoken then Kaine on Keystone, but he voted against legislation last year that would have approved the pipeline without sign-off from the administration, which has repeatedly put off a decision on the project.

So what we have here is what is known as a “Conflict of Interest,” and a number of people on both sides of the issue have caught on to them.

“This is not an ‘appearance of conflict of interest,’ it is a bald-faced conflict of interest,” said Ron Arnold, executive vice president of the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise.

Arnold, the author of Ecology Wars: Environmentalism as if People Matter, said the two legislators should “divest themselves of the tainted investments and recuse themselves from remarks and votes on the issue.”

Sen. David Vitter (R., La), the ranking Republican on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, previously criticized Steyer for maintaining a stake in Kinder Morgan while pursuing his intense anti-Keystone advocacy.

I’m not sure, but this might be something that could be brought the Ethics committee, not that they will do anything. This level of corruption is part and parcel of Washington DC and over the last couple of decades, the Progressive Liberal Democrats have been benefiting from it, (And getting caught at it), far more the Republicans. The major difference between the two parties is how it’s dealt with. When Republicans catch one of their own, they won’t hesitate to bounce them out on their asses ONCE that corruption is proven. The Progressive Liberal Democrats? They circle the wagons and not only protect their corrupt members, they will usually reward them.

Both parties need a good house cleaning, but it looks like the Democrats could also use fumigation and sterilization…with fire! There are two ways this can be accomplished. One is the election process, the other is literally with fire. Personally, I prefer the former. Remember in November!

Thatisall

~The Angry Webmaster~

(1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)

Loading...