To Approve the Keystone XL Pipeline

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, it took an election on November 4. It took an election, but here we are at long last, some 6 years after the initial application for the Keystone XL Pipeline was filed and, as you know, for a long time now, I think at least since 2012, we have been trying to get a vote, the very same vote that is now scheduled for this afternoon. We have been trying to get a vote on the Senate floor so we could see whether there was a bipartisan majority, a supermajority of 60 or more, who would join our colleagues in the House and pass this bill authorizing the Keystone XL Pipeline and send it to the President.

We know the Keystone XL Pipeline would be good for our economy. We know it would be good for job creation, and I know there has been some quibbling, perhaps, about how many jobs, but the Department of State has said about 42,000 jobs would be created as a result of this project.

We also know this would be good for U.S. energy security to have a source of safe energy from Canada--one of our best allies and partners to the north--as opposed to shipping it in from troubled regions like the Middle East. It makes sense from an energy security standpoint, and it would be good for national security as well. It would also be good for our strategic interests overseas.

I have heard my colleagues, mainly on the other side say that, well, we are concerned about the environmental impact, and I am too, but President Obama's own State Department has once again found that the Keystone XL Pipeline would have a negligible impact on the environment.

In short, even in a moment of intense polarization in Washington, there is a strong consensus on Keystone, and if we get 60-plus votes today I think that consensus will be demonstrated.

Will we all agree? No. We have strongly held beliefs on both sides of this issue. But the way we function in the Senate is by actually scheduling votes--as we are going to have today--and letting the majority carry the day. And that, I predict, will happen today.

This is a day that I know my colleague, the senior Senator from North Dakota, Senator Hoeven, has been working for a long time, again, across the aisle. He has been our No. 1 leader on this issue for years now and he has consistently explained the benefits of the Keystone XL Pipeline.

He comes from North Dakota, the second most productive State in the country when it comes to oil and gas. I come from the No. 1 State. I point that out often when it comes to producing oil and gas, and this has been a renaissance for the American economy and for American energy, what has happened in America, thanks to private investment and innovation in the oil and gas industry.

Senator Hoeven has constantly worked with people across the aisle to rally the kind of support that has led us to this day, and he has repeatedly pressed the majority leader, Senator Reid, to allow a binding vote on the floor such as we are going to have today, and then the next step will be to send it to President Obama for his signature.

Well, we haven't had that kind of vote before the November 4 election. That is why I said elections can change things and indeed, apparently, it has changed the majority leader's mind to allow this vote, which at long last we will have this afternoon.

Why has there been a change of attitude on the part of the majority leader to allow us to hold this vote this week? I will leave that to the pundits, but I will say our collective decision on Keystone should be determined by what is in America's national interests, not the interest of a single political party or the interest of a single Senator. The interests of our country as a whole should be our guide.

For that matter, it is time for our President to put his cards on the table. I know once this vote was scheduled, the President's press secretary and the President himself made some ambiguous remarks, leaving in doubt whether he would actually sign or would ultimately veto this legislation. I hope we don't see a continuation of the gamesmanship we have seen until this point, and that once this bill passes--if it does this afternoon--the majority leader will send it promptly to the President so the President can make that decision.

What I mean by I hope the gamesmanship doesn't continue is I know there is the flexibility the majority leader might have to actually hold the bill here and to wait until after the December 6 runoff election in Louisiana before sending it to the President. But I hope we don't have that kind of gamesmanship.

The American people deserve the truth, they deserve accountability, and it has been more than 6 years since this application first came through. The proponents of this project deserve this vote today, as do the American people.

As a matter of fact, back in March of 2012, before his reelection, the President traveled to Cushing, OK, to champion the Texas leg of the Keystone XL Pipeline. He didn't have any real role to play in authorizing that, because that was within the continental United States. The President's role, and the one that this bill would force his hand on, literally, is what would authorize this international pipeline between Canada and the United States. That does require his approval. This legislation would require it or, in fact, mandate it.

But he went to Cushing, OK, to champion the Texas leg of the Keystone Pipeline project, and it did not need his approval, but at the time he said he would work to expedite that portion. However, that portion didn't require his approval and it was already up and running at the time. So you will have to determine why the President would go there for a project that did not need his approval and said he would expedite it--what his real motivation is. But he said:

And as long as I'm President, we're going to keep on encouraging oil development and infrastructure and we're going to do it in a way that protects the health and safety of the American people. We don't have to choose between one or the other, we can do both.

I actually agree with what the President said, the words I just quoted. That is a good statement of what our policy should be. But I have been around Washington long enough to know that we can't just listen to what people say, we have to watch what they actually do, because sometimes those are diametrically opposed.

In this case, notwithstanding what the President said in Cushing, OK, he has continued to delay, delay, and delay, making a final decision on the portion of Keystone XL Pipeline that requires his approval.

But we are here this afternoon to say enough is enough. Regardless of how this vote turns out, it is time for the President to explain his views on the project that his own State Department has said would create 42,000 jobs in America. He can choose to endorse the Keystone XL Pipeline and thereby deliver a significant boost to America's economy, America's security, and America's relations with our largest trading partner in Canada.

Alternatively, the President can choose to oppose Keystone and thereby miss a golden opportunity to promote a richer, stronger, and safer American future. I can only hope he makes the right choice.

I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source