The Keystone XL, Cynicism and A Public Engaged

Mark Green
Posted January 20, 2012

Hours after President Obama rejected the job-creating, energy-delivering Keystone XL pipeline, “The Fix” blogger Chris Cillizza, a leading member of the Washington Beltway commenting class, weighed the potential political fallout from president’s choice and concluded with a resounding “Meh”:

“Regular people don’t care. … It’s simply not an issue that has broken through with the average person. There is no — we repeat no — credible polling on how many people are even aware of the pipeline (or the debate over it), a fact that suggests that it’s not penetrated anywhere close to broad public awareness … In short: If you care about the issue, you really care. But most people don’t.”

Now, Cillizza writes a well-read blog, but we think he’s mistaken about the Keystone XL’s public visibility. This is evident in a series of public hearings the State Department held last year and strong public support for the project by the governor of every state along the proposed route. As for polling, Rasmussen Reports, a nationally recognized public opinion firm, tested the project’s popularity in November and found 60 percent favor building the pipeline, compared to just 24 percent opposed.

More importantly, Cillizza might be underestimating public reaction to a presidential move that’s arguably one of the more cynical political plays in a good while:

• The president says he’s for increased infrastructure – but rejected the biggest shovel-ready project in America, one that would create thousands of U.S. jobs during construction and be a critical part of an energy strategy that could create or support hundreds of thousands of U.S. jobs over the next two decades.

• The president says he’s for increased oil and natural gas production – but rejected the actual project to help that happen. The Keystone XL not only would bring oil from neighbor and ally Canada to U.S. refiners, it would be a vital link between those refiners and rapidly growing oil production from the Bakken shale formation in North Dakota.

• The president said he had to reject the Keystone XL because there wasn’t enough time to consider the proposal. Lots more on that here, but basically, the federal government has been studying the Keystone XL for more than three years. It has cleared three consecutive environmental reviews. (Concerns about a small portion of the route in Nebraska are being worked out; Nebraska Gov. Don Heineman called the president’s rejection a “big mistake.”)

• The president said his rejection of the Keystone XL “is not a judgment on the merits of the pipeline,” yet that’s exactly what he was supposed to decide: Whether the pipeline is in the nation’s interest. Still no call on that from the president, with the project now into its fourth year of consideration.

• The president’s decision on the Keystone XL’s merits, the final “national interest” determination, is being deferred until early 2013 – after this fall’s elections.

See, politics is one thing. It’s the cynical, say-one-thing-do-another conduct that riles people up. On the Keystone XL, it’s the abdication of leadership, an unwillingness to identify clear national interest above a political agenda (noted last month by former Obama U.S. national security advisor Gen. Jim Jones), that feeds public frustration.

This is underscored by the range of commentary hitting the president’s call/non-call on the Keystone XL:

• Washington Post – “We almost hope this was a political call because, on the substance, there should be no question.

• Wall Street Journal – “TransCanada's $7 billion shovel-ready project that would support tens of thousands of jobs if only it could get the requisite U.S. permits. Those jobs, apparently, can wait.”

• Chicago Tribune – “Obama made a decision that will cost the U.S. good jobs. He seems to think those jobs will still be there when he gets around to making a decision on the pipeline. But they may well be gone for good.”

• Washington Times – “The decision makes no sense. … President Obama continues to demonstrate that he has no idea how real jobs are created or how the economy works.”

• American Enterprise Institute energy scholar Kenneth P. Green – “The Obama administration’s decision … is emblematic of the pervasive, systematic hostility the administration has shown to all forms of fossil-fuel production and consumption.”

• Syndicated columnist Robert Samuelson – “President Obama’s rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico is an act of national insanity. … The cynicism is breathtaking.”

Yes, it is. Which is why we suspect lots of “regular people” are taking note.