Pushing the pipeline

Republicans, with some Democratic support, are trying to force construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline despite a denial by the U.S. State Department of the permit allowing the project to cross the border from Canada before making its way to Texas.

This might seem like a job-creating no-brainer. TransCanada estimates its $13 billion project will create 13,000 construction jobs, 7,000 manufacturing jobs and 118,000 “spin-off jobs.”

Based on these numbers and an understanding that neoliberalism, the dominant political ideology in the U.S., is best, one might conclude the project should be allowed as quickly as possible for the sake of the economy.

However, numbers, like politicians, can be deceiving.

Cornell University’s Global Labor Institute conducted an independent study of the project, finding that the pipeline will create much fewer jobs than projected, that most jobs generated “will be temporary and non-local” and that the project could, in fact, kill more jobs than it creates.

The study suggests the project will increase fuel prices by diverting crude-oil flow from Midwest refineries to the Gulf of Mexico for export to markets where it might be sold at higher prices.

Not only would the increased fuel prices kill jobs, environmental damage caused by the pipeline would negatively affect the rise of green economy.

So, why in the world would any politician want to push this project forward? Are they giving TransCanada, which might benefit most, more credit than researchers at Cornell?

This fall, 1,253 people in opposition to the pipeline were arrested in front of the White House, and a month later, roughly 10,000 people returned to encircle the White House.

Congress didn’t miss these protests. These politicians are privy to the information provided by the project’s opposition.

They have ignored the study produced by an academic institution for a reason.

It comes down to money, and the oil and gas industry has a lot of it.

Government approval ratings and election participation are incredibly low — historically low, even.

Many citizens now recognize their vote plays an insignificant role in the political system thought to be representative democracy.

Some, including the majority of those involved in the Occupy phenomenon, would point to the money’s influence in politics as a foundational issue with the U.S.

The controversy over Keystone XL demonstrates this problem quite effectively.

Oil and gas lobbying expenditures totaled nearly $150 million in 2011. In the 2008 and 2010 election cycles, more than $30 million was contributed to campaigns, mostly going to Republicans, who are now primarily responsible for pushing the pipeline.

Money wins elections. Lobbying significantly influences lawmaking.

This can’t continue. Issues such as Keystone XL are more than numbers and job calculations. I would have preferred to address the environmental effect of the project.

NASA climatologist James Hansen said the pipeline would mean “game over” for the climate, but how can I expect readers to care when jobs and money are prioritized more than the environment?

­— poren@indiana.edu