Senate Democrats pushing Reid to allow a vote on pro-Keystone XL legislation

Hot Air ^ | May 1,2014 | ERIKA JOHNSEN

[Hojczyk]

Keystone XL supporters on Thursday introduced legislation they said was backed by 56 senators that would immediately greenlight the controversial oil pipeline.

“I have 56 hard yeses,” Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.), who introduced the bill with Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), told reporters Thursday.

“Beyond that I’ve got six or seven maybes. Our challenge is going to be to get to 60 votes,” he said. …

Hoeven said talks are still in the works with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to get the bill to the floor. …

Landrieu says she wants a vote on stand-alone legislation, and seemed adamant that anything else was out of the question on Thursday.

“The decision has already been made — we are moving forward on a vote on Keystone, and we are going to move forward on the energy efficiency bill,” Landrieu said.Keystone XL supporters on Thursday introduced legislation they said was backed by 56 senators that would immediately greenlight the controversial oil pipeline.

“I have 56 hard yeses,” Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.), who introduced the bill with Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), told reporters Thursday.

“Beyond that I’ve got six or seven maybes. Our challenge is going to be to get to 60 votes,” he said. …

Hoeven said talks are still in the works with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to get the bill to the floor. …

Landrieu says she wants a vote on stand-alone legislation, and seemed adamant that anything else was out of the question on Thursday.

“The decision has already been made — we are moving forward on a vote on Keystone, and we are going to move forward on the energy efficiency bill,” Landrieu said.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) has indicated in the last couple of days that he’s open to a vote. But in agreeing to one, he’s in the difficult position of having to decide whether to make it a binding measure that would somehow force the Obama administration’s hand, or just a resolution of support for the pipeline. …

Whether to even schedule a vote has created a challenge for Senate Democratic leaders. If they avoiding one, they’d play into the hands of Republicans, who argue that if Democrats were serious about helping wage earners, they would authorize construction of the pipeline and the jobs it would create. By scheduling a vote, they boost lawmakers like Ms. Landrieu, who is in a tough re-election battle, but risk splitting their party, which is divided between oil-state Democrats on one side and environmental-leaning Democrats on the other.

[WMarshal]

Landrieu’s panties are in a wad over her polls in Louisiana. If she was a shoe-in for re-election we would not hear a peep out of this democrat loser.

[FlingWingFlyer]

Come on Hopalong! Enough of the “delay” BS! Stick it to the voters BEFORE the November elections, you coward!

[Political Junkie Too]

“I have 56 hard yeses,” Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.), who introduced the bill with Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.)

As much as people want the Keystone XL pipeline approved by Obama, what does a Senate vote have to do with what is an executive decision?

And why would a Republican help the most vulnerable Democrat in the Senate with a campaign issue that could revive her so close to the election?

-PJ

[Paladin2]

"what does a Senate vote have to do with what is an executive decision?"

Congress gets to change the rules if they want to.

[chiefqc]

Hey maybe for the d right amour of money under the table reid may be able to help you, after all he’ll be doing something near and dear to his heart - lining his pockets with money.

[ExCTCitizen]

Mary wanted the Keystone pipeline for a long time. Hoeven is trying to show leadership, something that Mitch don’t do.

[Political Junkie Too]

I get that he's trying to show leadership, but surely he can find a way to do it that doesn't benefit Landrieu more than it benefits himself.

-PJ

[fifedom]

Hoeven is an idiot or worse for giving Landrieu this free publicity. Even if Congress passes this bill over a veto, Hussein would ignore it. The Kenyan knows from Clintong’s impeachment that the Senate will never convict a Democrat especially a mixed-race one.

[Cicero]

It would benefit the whole country if the Keystone Pipeline is approved. It would improve our relations with Canada, which Obama has been undermining. And it would make Obama and his fake environmentalists look like jerks.

If Landrieu gets a bit of political benefit from it, I think that’s relatively minor in light of the benefits.

[jeffc]

It seems to me that Dems up for re-election this year want to be able to tell voters back home that they voted to “help bring down gas prices” by voting for the Keystone pipeline, knowing all along that obammy will veto it.

[Mariner]

"And why would a Republican help the most vulnerable Democrat in the Senate with a campaign issue that could revive her so close to the election?"

Harry Reid is supposed to have 55 votes in the Senate under his control.

Let him pass this non-binding piece of crap and political cover without a single GOP vote.

[ModelBreaker]

So they’ll let vulnerable dems vote FOR cloture (therefore for the pipeline). But they will just miss invoking cloture. A fake vote for dishonest politicians.

[cpdiii]

Landrieu says she wants a vote on stand-alone legislation, and seemed adamant that anything else was out of the question on Thursday.

Landrieu is trying to save her ass in the next election. The only way she can save her political future is to switch parties and go against Obama Care for which she voted and also support the Keystone pipeline.

If she does not do all of the above, she is dead meat.

[Busko]

Running to Harry Hitler to save their liberal social assesw is funny and they need to be ousted.

[okie01]

I>And why would a Republican help the most vulnerable Democrat in the Senate with a campaign issue that could revive her so close to the election?

Two reasons:

1. It would help North Dakota

2. It would help the USA.

[Political Junkie Too]

Both true, and have been true since the beginning.

Obama has dithered on it for years, and apparently, the sense of urgency from others in government hasn't been there either.

So why the hurry to help Landrieu now?

Obama delayed it for years, and Republicans have only been perfunctory in their response, for years. We can't wait another few months, and perhaps pick this up in December?

Landrieu needs to be hammered over her being the deciding vote on Obamacare. She bragged about that.

The Louisiana Purchase.

I wonder if this is really Mitch McConnell green-lighting the rehabilitation of Landrieu by handing her the Keystone issue so she can shine, instead of pounding her over and over for being the deciding vote for Obamacare.

Isn't that what the 2014 mid-term election was supposed to be? The fight over Obamacare by control of the Senate?

-PJ

[okie01]

You evidently understand my point (it's best for the country) and I assure you that I understand your point(the politics are questionable, from a GOP standpoint).

Especially since the decision itself is, by statute, reserved to the Executive Department and is beyond Congress' purview.

Let's stipulate that the bill passes the Senate. At which point, Obama will veto it, I would imagine.

In which case, Obama and the Democrats (overall) lose points with the voting public. Do the red-state Democrats who supported the bill (e.g., Landrieu) gain enough credit to profit?

If, on the other hand, the Senate doesn't pass the bill, the Democrats (overall) again lose points. But, again, do the red-state Democrats who supported the bill (e.g. Landrieu) gain enough credit to profit?

I don't really know the answer to those two questions...

Seems to me the only way that the Red-State Democrats can for sure win points is to a.) pass the bill AND b.) have Obama respond positively. Which I don't think is gonna happen...