Republican Senator: War in Syria Increases Chances for Keystone XL Pipeline Approval

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:VOA_Arrott_-_A_View_of_Syria,_Under_Government_Crackdown_08.jpg">Elizabeth Arrott</a>/VOA News, via Wikimedia Commons


The Syrian civil war has resulted in more than two years of misery, a body count of roughly 100,000, too many war crimes to count, and talk of yet another American war effort. It might also boost the chances for approval of the Keystone pipeline, says a Republican senator.

“I believe it does,” Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND) told the Dickinson Press on Thursday. “Right now, we’re determining how to respond in the Middle East, specifically Syria, and it shows, with the volatile situation there, how important it is that we can produce our own energy in North America and not have to get it from the Middle East.”

On Thursday morning, Hoeven and Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) introduced a resolution supporting the construction of the controversial Keystone pipeline, which would transport Canadian tar sands oil to the Gulf Coast in Texas. Syria isn’t a big producer of oil, and the Middle Eastern country’s exports have been severely restricted by sanctions imposed by Western powers. But it’s located near important pipelines and sea routes, and the Syria crisis and talk of US airstrikes have sharply affected oil prices.

Hoeven isn’t the only Republican tying Keystone to intervening in Syria. In late August, former House speaker and current Crossfire co-host Newt Gingrich recommended that House Republicans should link the two hot-button issues. “House GOP should combine Keystone Pipeline and Syria into one up or down vote,” Gingrich tweeted. “[Let’s] see who wants war while opposing American energy.” Right now, it seems that both decision are being put off. It is likely President Obama’s final decision on the Keystone XL project will be made next year, and this week the president asked Congress to delay a vote on authorization of military force against the Assad regime.

 

h/t Ben Geman

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate

Share your feedback: We’re planning to launch a new version of the comments section. Help us test it.