WASHINGTON — Legislation by Rep. Lee Terry, R-Neb., to force approval of the Keystone XL pipeline advanced Tuesday.
The House Energy and Commerce Committee voted 33 to 20 — largely along party lines — to send the bill to the floor. It is expected to be attached to a highway and energy infrastructure bill and receive a full House vote next week.
Terry said after the vote that there is less than zero chance the Senate will take up his bill but said it's important for House Republicans to keep pushing the issue.
"If we set our agenda to match the Senate's, we'd just be sitting around watching TV all day," he said.
Terry's bill would transfer authority over TransCanada's pipeline to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. It also would require the agency to issue a permit within 30 days for the 1,700-mile pipeline that would carry tar sands oil from Canada to Gulf Coast refineries.
The Obama administration rejected the project last month, saying it did not have enough time for the necessary review work before a Feb. 21 deadline that Republicans included in the payroll tax cut extension.
Pipeline opponents point out that while TransCanada has agreed to move the pipeline out of the Sand Hills, it has yet to identify the new route. Republicans point to exemptions in their proposals allowing the search for a new Nebraska route to continue.
The committee approved Terry's bill after defeating several amendments offered by Democrats. Several of the Democrats said they are sympathetic to building the pipeline but want to do it responsibly and said Republicans are hurting their cause by trying to ram the project through. Republicans said Democrats are trying to drag their feet and are throwing out red herrings.
The first amendment, by Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., would have barred TransCanada from initiating or threatening to initiate eminent domain in order to obtain rights of way for the $7 billion project.
Nebraskan Randy Thompson, whose family owns land crossed by the originally proposed route, has testified that TransCanada has been an overly aggressive bully trying to push landowners around as it secures easements for the project.
"This is an imperious approach," Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., said, citing Thompson's testimony.
Republicans countered that eminent domain procedures are laid out in state law, which would be overturned by Rush's amendment. They also said the amendment would allow a single landowner opposed to a pipeline to stop the project by refusing to negotiate with the company.
The committee also debated an amendment by Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., to require oil from the pipeline to stay in the United States.
Markey said the pipeline poses grave environmental hazards in the form of increased greenhouse gas emissions and oil spills and questioned why the United States would accept those risks without assurances of any benefits.
"Under this bill, there are no guarantees that even a drop of the tar sands oil and fuels will stay in this country," Markey said. "This bill is not about energy security, it is not about jobs, it is about oil company profits plain and simple. This bill just turns the United States into a middleman in a multinational oil deal between Canada, South America, Europe and China."
Terry said that the United States imported 11.8 million barrels per day of oil or refined gasoline in 2011 and that the pipeline would provide up to 700,000 barrels of crude per day.
"If they're getting it from a reliable source in Canada and not from Saudi Arabia or Venezuela, then that adds to our national energy security," Terry said.
Republicans conceded that some of the oil would likely be turned into diesel fuel and other products that would be exported but said that's a good thing for the country's manufacturing base and overall trade balance.
An amendment by Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif, would have put off approval of the Keystone XL until after completion of a study on transporting hazardous liquids by pipeline. She said Terry's bill is an attempt to leapfrog existing laws aimed at ensuring pipelines are safe and jam through one particular project.
Terry referenced stacks of binders filled with environmental reviews.
"This is interesting that we keep talking about this leapfrogging like we're jumping over the environmental study," Terry said. "In fact, I can't jump that high."
Terry said all the work has been done, including dozens of extra conditions placed on Keystone XL.
Another amendment would have required 75 percent of the iron and steel for the pipeline to be produced in North America, while another would have reset the process of reviewing the pipeline.
All of the Democrats' amendments were defeated.
The committee accepted several changes offered by Terry aimed at concerns raised by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Land Management that Terry's proposal would eliminate their role in the review process. The Corps reviews pipelines when they cross rivers, while the bureau negotiates rights-of-way when pipelines cross federal lands.
Bold Nebraska, which opposes the Keystone XL pipeline, launched a new effort Tuesday to pressure Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman on the pipeline.
Heineman asked President Barack Obama last summer to reject the pipeline because of concerns about its route through the Sand Hills and the Ogallala Aquifer. The governor said at the time he opposed the route but not the pipeline.
Heineman called a special legislative session, which resulted in TransCanada's agreeing to change the route through Nebraska to avoid the Sand Hills. After Obama rejected the pipeline, Heineman said he was disappointed because the administration could have issued a conditional permit allowing construction to start outside Nebraska while determining the new route.
Jane Kleeb of Bold Nebraska criticized Heineman on Tuesday for expressing support for the pipeline, saying the aquifer is still at risk. “The governor is essentially saying, route unknown, ‘I think that this pipeline should be built as fast as possible,' ” Kleeb said.
Heineman has been consistent, said his spokeswoman, Jen Rae Hein. “The governor supports a route that does not put the Sand Hills at risk. That has been his position all along.”
Contact the writer:
202-630-4823, joe.morton@owh.com
