|
 |
The White House
Obama vetoes
Keystone XL Pipeline bill
This morning (Nov. 6), speaking from the Roosevelt Room, the President
announced that the State Department determined that the Keystone XL
Pipeline would not serve the national interest of the United States.
For years, this topic has occupied a huge portion of our country's
climate discourse. And after explaining why this pipeline "would not
serve the national interest of the United States," the President called
attention to the broader climate challenges facing America and the
global community heading into international climate negotiations in
Paris this December:
"…we’ve got to come together around an ambitious framework to protect
the one planet that we’ve got while we still can. If we want to prevent
the worst effects of climate change before it’s too late, the time to
act is now. Not later. Not someday. Right here, right now."
Here's the full text of his remarks -- they're worth a read.
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning, everybody. Several years ago, the State
Department began a review process for the proposed construction of a
pipeline that would carry Canadian crude oil through our heartland to
ports in the Gulf of Mexico and out into the world market.
This morning, Secretary Kerry informed me that, after extensive public
outreach and consultation with other Cabinet agencies, the State
Department has decided that the Keystone XL Pipeline would not serve
the national interest of the United States. I agree with that decision.
This morning, I also had the opportunity to speak with Prime Minister
Trudeau of Canada. And while he expressed his disappointment, given
Canada’s position on this issue, we both agreed that our close
friendship on a whole range of issues, including energy and climate
change, should provide the basis for even closer coordination between
our countries going forward. And in the coming weeks, senior members of
my team will be engaging with theirs in order to help deepen that
cooperation.
Now, for years, the Keystone Pipeline has occupied what I, frankly,
consider an overinflated role in our political discourse. It became a
symbol too often used as a campaign cudgel by both parties rather than
a serious policy matter. And all of this obscured the fact that this
pipeline would neither be a silver bullet for the economy, as was
promised by some, nor the express lane to climate disaster proclaimed
by others.
To illustrate this, let me briefly comment on some of the reasons why
the State Department rejected this pipeline.
First: The pipeline would not make a meaningful long-term contribution
to our economy. So if Congress is serious about wanting to create jobs,
this was not the way to do it. If they want to do it, what we should be
doing is passing a bipartisan infrastructure plan that, in the short
term, could create more than 30 times as many jobs per year as the
pipeline would, and in the long run would benefit our economy and our
workers for decades to come.
Our businesses created 268,000 new jobs last month. They’ve created
13.5 million new jobs over the past 68 straight months -- the longest
streak on record. The unemployment rate fell to 5 percent. This
Congress should pass a serious infrastructure plan, and keep those jobs
coming. That would make a difference. The pipeline would not have made
a serious impact on those numbers and on the American people’s
prospects for the future.
Second: The pipeline would not lower gas prices for American consumers.
In fact, gas prices have already been falling -- steadily. The national
average gas price is down about 77 cents over a year ago. It’s down a
dollar over two years ago. It’s down $1.27 over three years ago. Today,
in 41 states, drivers can find at least one gas station selling gas for
less than two bucks a gallon. So while our politics have been consumed
by a debate over whether or not this pipeline would create jobs and
lower gas prices, we’ve gone ahead and created jobs and lowered gas
prices.
Third: Shipping dirtier crude oil into our country would not increase
America’s energy security. What has increased America’s energy security
is our strategy over the past several years to reduce our reliance on
dirty fossil fuels from unstable parts of the world. Three years ago, I
set a goal to cut our oil imports in half by 2020. Between producing
more oil here at home, and using less oil throughout our economy, we
met that goal last year -- five years early. In fact, for the first
time in two decades, the United States of America now produces more oil
than we buy from other countries.
Now, the truth is, the United States will continue to rely on oil and
gas as we transition -- as we must transition -- to a clean energy
economy. That transition will take some time. But it’s also going more
quickly than many anticipated. Think about it. Since I took office,
we’ve doubled the distance our cars will go on a gallon of gas by 2025;
tripled the power we generate from the wind; multiplied the power we
generate from the sun 20 times over. Our biggest and most successful
businesses are going all-in on clean energy. And thanks in part to the
investments we’ve made, there are already parts of America where clean
power from the wind or the sun is finally cheaper than dirtier,
conventional power.
The point is the old rules said we couldn’t promote economic growth and
protect our environment at the same time. The old rules said we
couldn’t transition to clean energy without squeezing businesses and
consumers. But this is America, and we have come up with new ways and
new technologies to break down the old rules, so that today, homegrown
American energy is booming, energy prices are falling, and over the
past decade, even as our economy has continued to grow, America has cut
our total carbon pollution more than any other country on Earth.
Today, the United States of America is leading on climate change with
our investments in clean energy and energy efficiency. America is
leading on climate change with new rules on power plants that will
protect our air so that our kids can breathe. America is leading on
climate change by working with other big emitters like China to
encourage and announce new commitments to reduce harmful greenhouse gas
emissions. In part because of that American leadership, more than 150
nations representing nearly 90 percent of global emissions have put
forward plans to cut pollution.
America is now a global leader when it comes to taking serious action
to fight climate change. And frankly, approving this project would have
undercut that global leadership. And that’s the biggest risk we face --
not acting.
Today, we’re continuing to lead by example. Because ultimately, if
we’re going to prevent large parts of this Earth from becoming not only
inhospitable but uninhabitable in our lifetimes, we’re going to have to
keep some fossil fuels in the ground rather than burn them and release
more dangerous pollution into the sky.
As long as I’m President of the United States, America is going to hold
ourselves to the same high standards to which we hold the rest of the
world. And three weeks from now, I look forward to joining my fellow
world leaders in Paris, where we’ve got to come together around an
ambitious framework to protect the one planet that we’ve got while we
still can.
If we want to prevent the worst effects of climate change before it’s
too late, the time to act is now. Not later. Not someday. Right here,
right now. And I’m optimistic about what we can accomplish together.
I’m optimistic because our own country proves, every day -- one step at
a time -- that not only do we have the power to combat this threat, we
can do it while creating new jobs, while growing our economy, while
saving money, while helping consumers, and most of all, leaving our
kids a cleaner, safer planet at the same time.
That’s what our own ingenuity and action can do. That's what we can
accomplish. And America is prepared to show the rest of the world the
way forward.
Thank you very much.
President Barack Obama
|
|
|
|
