# US House Links Payroll Tax Extension to Keystone Pipeline



## tomahawk6 (8 Dec 2011)

Its a solid strategy by the republicans.The pipeline would put 20,000 mostly union workers to work. Whereas the payroll tax extension helps those with a job. The bonus is that once the oil flows it will lessen our dependence on arab oil.


----------



## cupper (9 Dec 2011)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Its a solid strategy by the republicans.The pipeline would put 20,000 mostly union workers to work. Whereas the payroll tax extension helps those with a job. The bonus is that once the oil flows it will lessen our dependence on arab oil.



Much as I disagree with the Republican strategies over the past 4 years, the whole Keystone issue should have been a done deal. It makes sense from an economic and strategic point of view. Eventually they will need to bring oil down from Alaska in a more convenient way than by Tanker, so it just makes sense to have the line now, and tie into it when the time comes.


----------



## ModlrMike (10 Dec 2011)

If you look at the proposed pipeline route to Texas, it flows through predominantly red states. Surely there's no political component to this?  :facepalm:


----------



## cupper (10 Dec 2011)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> If you look at the proposed pipeline route to Texas, it flows through predominantly red states. Surely there's no political component to this?  :facepalm:



Noooooo. Not at all. Since when has any political consideration been involved in planning major projects that could deliver $billions in goods and services contracts and jobs.

Can't think of any examples. None. :dunno:


----------



## tomahawk6 (10 Dec 2011)

Red states have always been friendly to the construction of oil refineries. It doesnt make much sense to take Canadian oil to either coast,they would never get a permit for construction.One day oil/gas from Alaska will get piped through Canada to the US.


----------



## tomahawk6 (13 Dec 2011)

The House passed the bill. Lets see what the Senate does with it. Anyone against jobs ?

http://news.yahoo.com/republicans-muscle-tax-cut-bill-house-235144990.html



> WASHINGTON (AP) — Defiant Republicans pushed legislation through the House Tuesday night that would keep alive Social Security payroll tax cuts for some 160 million Americans at President Barack Obama's request — but also would require construction of a Canada-to-Texas oil pipeline that has sparked a White House veto threat.
> 
> Passage, on a largely party-line vote of 234-193, sent the measure toward its certain demise in the Democratic-controlled Senate, triggering the final partisan showdown of a remarkably quarrelsome year of divided government.
> 
> ...


----------



## cupper (14 Dec 2011)

I am. If you want mine, you can have it. ;D


----------



## Robert0288 (14 Dec 2011)

In an interview earlier this month obama said he would veto if the republicans linked the payroll tax extension to keystone, and the republicans just put him between a rock and cliff.  This all has to do with election money for him as there are too many special interest democrat/lefty donor groups opposed to keystone who will deny funds if it passes.  Also well as the payroll tax is his party's baby from what I remeber.  He's basically screwed if he does, screwed if he doesn't.  Although if this same vote came up after the next election, either party would have instantly agreed to keystone.

Conclusion, american politics is %!@# beyond all belief :facepalm:


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Dec 2011)

The bill has to pass the Senate first, and the Democrat majority there has shown itself willing to protect Obama in the past.


----------



## tomahawk6 (14 Dec 2011)

Its an upcoming election year and creating jobs no matter your party should be a no brainer. Supporting energy security for the country is or should be a national security issue.Its a win win IF you are on the correct side of this issue.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (14 Dec 2011)

The cracks are appearing in the First Nation front against the Endbridge proposal to build an oil terminal in Kitimat. The final decision to build will be a political one based on feedback from the reviewing Panel. I am pretty sure what the political choice is going to be. The US has taken for granted first choice access to our resources, once the the oil terminal is built and at least 1 of the 3 LNG terminal in the same area is built, the US will have to compete with the rest of the world for our oil and gas.
That's not to say piping to connect to the existing transmissions line to the south won't happen, which I know it is currently happening.


----------



## cupper (14 Dec 2011)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Its an upcoming election year and creating jobs no matter your party should be a no brainer. Supporting energy security for the country is or should be a national security issue.Its a win win IF you are on the correct side of this issue.



It would be a no brainer, but unfortunately when the pols have no brain, this is the result.


----------



## Robert0288 (15 Dec 2011)

Jobs to generic working people do not bring in large amounts of money from the special interest groups or commy-fornia.  If it creates 20k jobs anywhere in the US, 45% are already voting for the democrats, the other 45% republicans, leaving 2k swing voters to nab from those directly effected.  Now since the pipeline runs through red states its more likely 55-60 vs 30-35 making your vote gain almost nothing.  Now if somone throws up 1-10 million at you for opposing, you win the lefty vote nation wide as well as 10million to influence any swing state you need.

Reelection money and votes just beat giving 20,000 people meaningful jobs boosting the economy and ensuring energy security.... Atleast until the election is over, then it doesn't matter for another 2 after that.


----------



## tomahawk6 (16 Dec 2011)

Looks like the Senate will join with the House to give the go ahead for the Keystone Pipeline.Nothing final yet but its looking good. The deal is as follows.



> What [it] basically does is require the State Department to issue the permit for Keystone XL within 60 days, unless President Obama explicitly says the pipeline is not in the national interest and kills it (that would definitely not be good for him to do).
> 
> It also tells State to allow construction to go ahead while it works with Nebraska to resolve any remaining environmental or routing issues. The governor and legislature there are on board with getting a new route to allay any concerns.
> 
> So we got the Keystone language, Dems got a 2 month extension of their payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance, but the cost is fully offset (with spending cuts) so it doesn’t add to the deficit.



Payroll tax break for 2 months
Keystone Pipeline authorized
No tax hikes
Fully paid for in other cuts


----------



## ModlrMike (16 Dec 2011)

I think this puts Mr Obama in a very difficult position: he vetos it and kills thousands of jobs, or he approves it and alienates the radical left. Either way he looks bad.


----------



## tomahawk6 (16 Dec 2011)

Don't worry this President wont have any trouble claiming credit for job creation.


----------



## cupper (17 Dec 2011)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Looks like the Senate will join with the House to give the go ahead for the Keystone Pipeline.Nothing final yet but its looking good. The deal is as follows.
> 
> Payroll tax break for 2 months
> Keystone Pipeline authorized
> ...



Don't count your chickens before they come home to roost.

Wait until the signing statement which says that extends the State Dept. review process back to the original 2013 date.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (17 Dec 2011)

cupper said:
			
		

> Don't count your chickens before they come home to roost.
> 
> Wait until the signing statement which says that extends the State Dept. review process back to the original 2013 date.



Pigeons.

Pigeons come home to roost.

Chickens, like the current Administration, never leave the safety of the known entity (the coop).

They won't stick out their neck and will stay where they believe they are safe and protected.


----------



## cupper (17 Dec 2011)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Pigeons.
> 
> Pigeons come home to roost.
> 
> ...



Actually, I always thought it was Cows that came home to roost.


----------



## Nemo888 (18 Dec 2011)

No offense to our American allies, but if we had a brain in our heads we would build a refinery in Canada and sell Americans fractionated product instead of crude. Currently we ship it to the states and then buy fractionated product from them. Personally I prefer Canada to be the profit maker on our natural resources. We could create most of the permanent jobs in Canada. The stats on how many jobs it will create are for the most part pulled out of thin air by lobbying firms on both sides. They are at best guesses. One side has been claiming 250,000 jobs created. The low number for permanent jobs for the pipeline is 20 by the State Department. I put permanent jobs at about 350. Its not like this pipeline will increase petroleum use so it is neutral in most respects except that petro execs think they can save money on shipping costs. The created jobs will be offset by the lost  jobs for workers on tankers who move that oil now. The construction is basically a stimulus package for the states it is going through with maybe 4000-6000 construction jobs max depending on how fast you want it constructed. This is not really a big deal for a country with over 3000,000,000 people.


----------



## Rifleman62 (18 Dec 2011)

Yes it would be nice to build a refinery in Canada, but nobody wants it in their neighborhood. I believe, up to a year or so ago, Edmonton was a location where a refinery was planned. It costs billions, and billions to build a refinery to the environmental/safety standards of today and the future. It would be great if the government encouraged the build.

Then we have the environment lobby, financed by US interests that are opposed. Plus the media, liberals/NDP.

In the US they have lots of refineries (visit Houston), import oil to refine, stop a pipeline that will create employment now and in the future.
Canada we have few refineries (Shell Montreal now a terminal ), lots of oil, with no will to build refineries to create employment now/future.

Some here explained the problem re building a refinery.


----------



## GAP (18 Dec 2011)

It's a question of resources. The same companies that already have refineries in the US are likely the same ones that would build and finance one in Canada. 
Their attitude is "If it's not broke, don't fix it. "


----------



## Rifleman62 (18 Dec 2011)

The 20's something member of the Security Sqn at the entrance of Fort Sam Houston, examined our passports ID on Wednesday, and said, Canada. Did you bring the pipeline? Then said ridiculous. Being in Texas, I assumed he meant the Obama policy.


> Their attitude is "If it's not broke, don't fix it. "



That's why I said: It would be great if the government encouraged the build.


----------



## GAP (18 Dec 2011)

> That's why I said: It would be great if the government encouraged the build.



That would simply translate into  billions of taxpayers $$. It has to be commercially viable on its' own merits.


----------



## Scott (18 Dec 2011)

We already have enough of a legacy of defunct, dream and total nightmare refineries in Canada. That's why I agree with GAP's comment: it has to be able to fly on its own.


----------



## Rifleman62 (18 Dec 2011)

> ........government *encouraged* the build


 can be without taxpayers dollars i.e expedite environmental studies.


----------



## a_majoor (18 Dec 2011)

In the end, the Republicans called his bluff:

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/200125-keystone-climbdown-leaves-obama-supporters-scratching-heads



> *Keystone climbdown leaves Obama supporters scratching their heads*
> By Amie Parnes	 - 12/17/11 06:54 PM ET
> 
> President Obama put two conditions in end-game talks on extending the payroll tax holiday.
> ...


----------



## DBA (18 Dec 2011)

The big infrastructure parts required are:
[list type=decimal]
[*]Transposition of oil to refinery
[*]Refinery
[*]Transportation of end products to users
[/list]

In addition it makes more sense to build #2 at locations with multiple sources of oil and #3 from areas with multiple refineries so neither are dependant on single sources or beholden to them if prices for other sources are better. This makes refineries and finished product distribution infrastructure dedicated to just the oil sands output a poor bet.


----------



## tomahawk6 (18 Dec 2011)

Alaska has wanted to pipe gas through Canada for quite some time now. There are huge amounts of gas but no way to get it to market. A pipeline is the best choice. Keystone may get that project moving as well.


----------



## a_majoor (19 Dec 2011)

The Keystone pipeline will also allow oil from Saskatchewan and North Dakota's Bakken fields to find their way to market faster as well (probably through a series of spur lines leading into the main pipeline, or paving the way for parallel pipeline infrastructure).

Shale oil and other "tight oil" projects will also be able to make use of the Keystone XL pipeline, so we should see many decades of use once the pipeline is built.


----------



## cupper (19 Dec 2011)

And it looks like the GOP may have blown it's own foot off in trying to call the Dems and White House bluff.
*
Payroll tax cut extension in doubt amid House Republican uproar*

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/payroll-tax-cut-extension-in-doubt-amid-house-republican-uproar/2011/12/18/gIQAoAhN3O_story.html

The fate of a payroll tax cut extension backed by the White House and overwhelmingly passed by the Senate is uncertain after a restive House Republican conference expressed displeasure with the two-month deal.

Faced with the uprising on his right flank, House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) retreated Sunday from his previous support for the package, saying the House does not expect to approve that plan on Monday night after it returns to Washington.


----------



## tomahawk6 (19 Dec 2011)

The Senate bill only was for 2 months and the House wants to fund the government through next fall. I dont see the point in a short term appropriation when everyone will be covering this ground in 2 months.


----------



## cupper (19 Dec 2011)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> The Senate bill only was for 2 months and the House wants to fund the government through next fall. I dont see the point in a short term appropriation when everyone will be covering this ground in 2 months.



You, me, and most sane members of the bouse.


----------



## cupper (20 Dec 2011)

House Republicans defeat two-month payroll tax cut

The House on Tuesday rejected a bipartisan Senate compromise to extend a payroll tax cut for two months, along with unemployment benefits, plunging Washington on the eve of Christmas into uncertainty about the fate of the tax cut enjoyed by 160 million workers.

On a vote of 229 to 193, the House set aside the Senate bill and requested a formal conference with the Senate, setting up a showdown with the Democratic-controlled Senate and President Obama, who has demanded that the House approve the short-term plan now to avoid a Jan. 1 tax hike.

Shortly after the House vote, Obama spokesman Jay Carney told reporters that House Republicans refused to hold a real vote on the bill that got “sweeping bipartisan support in the Senate” because the House Republican leadership was “worried” it “would actually pass.”

“This is not a game. … it is absoulately essential the House reconsider its approach to this and accept that leaders in both parties in both houses and the president of the United States are all committed to a full-year extension,” Carney declared.

“When it comes to what happened this weekend, the president is not and should not be a marriage counselor between Senate Republicans and House Republicans.”

Shining light of democracy my ass! :facepalm:


----------



## a_majoor (20 Dec 2011)

The twistd political logic behind all this is to keep issues like Keystone XL and private sector job creation front and center in the public mind. The tax cut extension is a logical non sequiter given the openly announced desire of the Administration and Democrats in the Senate and House to raise taxes (indeed their entire world view seems to orbit around the logic that the only tool in the economic tool kit is a tax increase, either directly raising taxs on "millionaires and billionaires", or allowing tax cut legislation to expire). 

The other political issue is the philosophical divide between the idea that private wealth creation is the means to generating prosperity vs redistributionist "spreading the wealth around". Punting the pipeline to after the election would have removed a powerful counter argument to the redistributionist idea, while keeping it forward advances the wealth creation argument.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/19/create-wealth-not-jobs/



> *MURRAY AND BIER: Create wealth, not jobs*
> Keystone XL pipeline would boost prosperity, not government
> Comments (25)|ShareTweet|Email|Print| Save for later
> By Iain Murray and David Bier-The Washington Times Monday, December 19, 2011 Illustration by Linas Garsys for The Washington Times
> ...


----------



## Colin Parkinson (20 Dec 2011)

DBA said:
			
		

> The big infrastructure parts required are:
> [list type=decimal]
> [*]Transposition of oil to refinery
> [*]Refinery
> ...



There are logistical issues in shipping the tar sand oil, actually a partial refinement might be worthwhile and reduce wear and tear on the pipe, might also reduce the need for condensate.


----------



## Rifleman62 (20 Dec 2011)

The House leader suggested to the President, that he get Harry to call the Senate (_prorogued_ until the end of Jan 12) back into session.


----------



## foresterab (20 Dec 2011)

Colin P said:
			
		

> There are logistical issues in shipping the tar sand oil, actually a partial refinement might be worthwhile and reduce wear and tear on the pipe, might also reduce the need for condensate.



As I understand it oilsands bitumen is basically a two stage refining process while convential light sweet crude is a single stage.  Because of this difference bitumen crude is being sold at a discount against West Texas Intermediate of somewhere in the range of 25% less the current market price of oil.  Condensate produced from natural gas drilling ironically is commanding a premium of ~ 110% of oil prices due to shortages in supply hence partly why so much natural gas drilling in liquids rich zones in Alberta at the moment.

There is 3? possibly 4 upgrader facilities on the books with a couple in production/design.  These upgraders (CNRL Horizon and Syncrude in Fort Mac, Total SA in Fort Saskatchewan, Shell Blackrock in Peace River/Grourard etc..) are basically designed to do a rough cleaning of the bitumen crude and upgrade it to a West Texas Intermediate equivalent which also allows for more blending of the upgraded oils with convential oils due to more similar chemistry.

Unfortunately you run into ALOT of legal and environmental hurdles to cross when building an upgrader plant let alone a refinery.  Everything from power grid needs to heating to water withdrawel plus a strong public outcry of "not in my backyard" yet the facility tends to need to be population centers to find qualified workers.  Also population centers tend to have better quality and higher capacity transportation infrastructure so movement of product is much more easily done (and cheaper).   

In regards to the pipelines with modern coatings and camera equiped "pigs" used to check the pipelines out as long as regular inspections and maintence are done the pipes are mostly safe...coatings can be re-applied with out exposing the pipe and/or chemicals are added to offset corrosion issues.  On older pipelines due to differnt welding technologies and in some cases less stringent monitoring plans built in corrossion is a much bigger issue..

Hope this helps...been out of dealing with oil and gas for a couple of years so it's off some fuzzy memories.
foresterab


----------



## cupper (21 Dec 2011)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> The House leader suggested to the President, that he get Harry to call the Senate (_prorogued_ until the end of Jan 12) back into session.



I believe that the Senate is out until Jan 23rd. But it appears that they will be holding pro forma session on Dec 23rd. Most likely to allow the GOP to prevent recess appointments from being made.


----------



## cupper (21 Dec 2011)

Both sides are playing games by forcing the other side to accept a poison pill or explain to the electorate why they rejected something that would turn their voters against them.

Currently the Dems have regained the upper hand.

And it appears that everyone is losing patients with Boehner's inability to control his own members.

Wouldn't be surprised if they end up cutting him out completely.


----------



## tomahawk6 (21 Dec 2011)

cupper said:
			
		

> Both sides are playing games by forcing the other side to accept a poison pill or explain to the electorate why they rejected something that would turn their voters against them.
> 
> Currently the Dems have regained the upper hand.
> 
> ...


----------



## a_majoor (23 Dec 2011)

Sigh. The GOP is being handed things on a plate, but seem determined to drop the serving tray. It seems to me that the focus for real change will have to be the downline elections, sweeping "Progressives" out of local, municipal and State offices, and applying strict fiscal discipline to their own houses. 

This will lead to a lot of knife fights, since one aspect of strict fiscal discipline will have to be undoing, defunding and closing down expensive and disfunctional "Progressive" initiatives, rolling back wages and benefits for unionized government workers (or firing lots of them to balance the books) and other short term measures. fighting the local war may not be as glamorous as fighting it out in Washington, but probably will have more positive results:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/286587/re-payroll-tax-mess-michael-walsh



> *Re: The Payroll Tax Mess*
> December 22, 2011 4:28 P.M.
> By Michael Walsh
> 
> ...


  

What is even worse is the entire debate is being framed with totally fake numbers:

http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/22/white-house-manipulating-payroll-tax-numbers-for-political-gains/?print=1



> *White House using fake numbers in payroll tax fight*
> 1:57 PM 12/22/2011
> ADVERTISEMENT
> 
> ...


----------



## Rifleman62 (23 Dec 2011)

If the payroll tax is extended 12 months (after the Nov 2012 election), I believe in Jan 2013, both the Bush Tax and the payroll tax, will expire. Interesting what will happen and who will be the President.


----------



## Edward Campbell (23 Dec 2011)

For all the weeping and wailing, this is, I think, just a _phase_ through which America must pass - rather like adolescence or, more appropriately, male menopause. America is passing from a "free and easy" phase (say, 1900-2000), rather like a person in the prime of his or her life, into the onset of old age, rather as Britain did in about 1900. The current political shenanigans are just the political expression of that change. Neither the _Tea Party_ nor the _Occupy_ movement matter.


----------



## cupper (24 Dec 2011)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> According to the Census Bureau, the U.S. economy supports only 131.7 million American workers — not 160 million. That total is only slightly up from last November’s total of 130.3 million workers, because of the stalled economy.(Interpolation: miscounting thirty million people is not a simple error)
> 
> Still, White House officials continue to push the 160 million number.
> 
> “We’ve been doing everything we can to ensure that 160 million working Americans aren’t hit with a holiday tax increase,” President Barack Obama said Dec. 22 at a White House press event intended to pressure the GOP into signing the Senate’s compromise deal on taxes and spending for 2012.



You need to review your articles for accuracy before posting.

The 160 Million number comes from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which is a direct count of the number of employed / unemployed receiving benefits who are responsible for paying the payroll tax. And yes, if you go to the BLS site, you will find that the number is more accurately noted to be 153,883,000, which includes 140,580,000 employed, and 13,303,000 unemployed receiving benefits.


----------



## Redeye (24 Dec 2011)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> If the payroll tax is extended 12 months (after the Nov 2012 election), I believe in Jan 2013, both the Bush Tax and the payroll tax, will expire. Interesting what will happen and who will be the President.



Barring something significant happening, who will be President is more or less a certainty, though there is a year to go. I think the hope the Democrats have is that they can play on public revulsion against the antics of the Congress, particularly with payroll tax holiday, to retake both Chambers, and allow the Bush tax cuts to come to an end among whatever other policies they have in mind. I'd expect the payroll tax cut is fine with them, as it benefits their base much more.

Tying the issue to something that a contingent of Dems seem to have an interest is quite a development.


----------

