Not enough Democratic votes to pass Keystone
I can’t help but conclude that the Democrats don’t really care all that much whether they have one more senator or one less during the next Congress, because they failed to get behind Mary Landrieu’s rather transparent bid to appear to have some influence over her party.
She most assuredly does not, or Keystone would have come to a vote in the Senate long ago. This vote was embarrassing: 59 to 41.
Keystone is very popular with the American people. It’s not the least bit popular with President Obama, however, who almost certainly would have vetoed it had it managed to pass.
My guess is that not only was the bill brought to a vote as a manipulative, unserious bid, not only would Obama have vetoed it if it had passed, but the 59-41 vote total (just one shy of the number needed) was orchestrated as well, in order to avoid embarrassing the president by his vetoing it.
It’s almost as though the Democrats wanted to embarrass Landrieu, though. Why bring the bill to a vote if it wouldn’t be passed? As for protecting the president from the need to veto it, won’t that veto happen anyway during the next session? It’s even possible that come January, Republicans will be able to muster enough Democratic votes to override the veto, making them look like the party of “yes.”
None of it makes much sense to me as a Democratic strategy unless—as becomes increasingly apparent—Democrats think the American people (or at least the voters of Louisiana) are really, really, really stupid.
Res ipsa loquitur.
Some months ago I went searching for the environmentalists’ reason for opposing the pipeline. I was shocked, but not surprised if that’s possible, to learn that their objection is that it would work too well. It would make an abundant supply of oil more easily transported to market. A pipeline is more secure, from a spillage standpoint, as well.
It has been claimed that Buffett’s railroad retains the business of transporting the oil that is produced now, so his relationship with the prez is paying off. Maybe. But under the circumstances, that is too straightforward.
In the double-think world of the Left, the fact that the pipeline is too efficient is reason enough.
“None of it makes much sense to me as a Democratic strategy unless–as becomes increasingly apparent–Democrats think the American people (or at least the voters of Louisiana) are really, really, really stupid.”
Well, isn’t that what Gruber said? He is a prog elitist. My read is that they really do believe that most of the voters are stupid.
I’m reading Codevilla’s book about the “Ruling Class.” The theme that the elites think the average voter is stupid runs through the book.
Many of the things that Obama does, which don’t maker sense to us, are done because he thinks most of us are stupid. The fact that he was re-elected pretty much confirmed his view for him.
The Keystone pipeline vote was political theater. We don’t see how it will help Landrieu, but Landrieu thinks it will help her. Why? Because she believes the voters are too stupid to get it.
We have to accept this fact: They really do think the voters are stupid. It explains a great deal.
Yeah.
Remember, Mary Landrieu’s the dame who’s convinced she lost her primary because those who have thrice voted her into office (turns out) are misogynist and — as an added bonus at no extra charge — are racist as well.
How many votes are needed to override a veto?
The Left in general has a bag full of pet issues based on the ideology that oil is evil.
By the way, isn’t this an example of the war on women? They threw a female senator under the bus to save a very male president. Judging by how they went apoplectic over that stupid t-shirt, this is no caricature. The left always eats its own.
Ya gotta wonder who else is expendable and if the senator saw this coming? I’m sure it is all for the greater good.
Democrats no longer care about anything but money and power.
The country, elections, laws, energy independence – mean nothing except what they mean for Dem Power Lust.
All Dems, at this point, as Dems, are rotten to the core.
There is not a good one left. Nowhere. None.
The last one was seen preparing to loot and burn in Fergusen.
The environmental lobby is powerful and rich and the Democrats don’t want to lose their support. Since they’ve already lost the Senate, I expect if Landrieu loses her runoff, they can live with that.
They’re looking ahead to 2016. And since the exit polls from the November midterms showed they were all about the economy, and not that the electorate had gone all conservative, I don’t think the Dems are terribly worried. That’s also why Bill Clinton has been loudly touting the good economic times under his administration.
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/steyer-vows-to-aid-anti-keystone-lawmakers-105788.html
Tom Steyer promised $100,000,000 in PAC spending (NextGen Climate Action) in favor of Democrats if Keystone was blocked… or against any Democrat that breaks ranks!
Doh!
He is credible because he has already spent large.
Whether he comes through….
Further, the royal Saudis are out against it, totally.
And you have Warren Buffett, piled on top.
You do the math.
FWIW, Senator Landrieu claimed that she had the 60 votes, though others correctly said she had just 59.
(About once a year I apologize to our Canadian friends for this absurd delay. They are, on the whole, great neighbors, and we should treat them better than we have in this case.)
Veto over-rides require two-thirds majorities in both houses. They aren’t easy.
I am missing something here. Normal legislation does not require a supermajority. As I understand it, if there was a filibuster placed on the bill, then it would require 60+ votes. Filibusters are not like “Mr. Smith goes to Washington” anymore. Or 60+ are need to override a Presidential veto.
What is special about this bill in that it needs 60+ votes before going to the WH to be vetoed?
It’s 60 votes because of the threat of a filibuster. Simplifying, it takes 60 votes to stop debate, except for budget bills. (As I recall, the Wikipedia article on Senate filibusters has a pretty good explanation of the history and details.)
See my previous comment for the general rule on veto over-rides.
Another reason the left hates Keystone: it makes Venezuelan oil less attractive to American refiners.
mousebert:
It was actually a vote on cloture.
Matthew M Says:
November 19th, 2014 at 12:14 am
Another reason the left hates Keystone: it makes Venezuelan oil less attractive to American refiners.
&&&&
Some of America’s largest refineries were revamped more than a generation ago to handle heavy, sour, crude.
The intention was, first, for Venezuelan crude…
[ The Orinoco strata have enough (massively thick) ‘oil’ to surpass all of OPEC. No-one has solved its extraction, so it’s never brought up in popular debate.]
And, KSA crude. Hard as this is to believe, MOST of Arab OPEC’s oil is heavy and sour. The industry simply started off with the light, sweet stuff.
Duh!
KSA brought pressure to bear on the Aramco ‘sisters’ to take Y heavy, sour barrels for every X sweet, light barrels. [ Chevron, Texaco, Exxon, Mobil ] (Get a load of the mergers!)
For those unaware: the heavy, sour, stuff goes off at one heck of a discount. (!!!) THIS is why the massive Exxon-Mobile refineries on the Gulf Coast are addicted (economically) to KSA crude. ( Yes, they totally undercut Hugo — going back years and years.)
&&&
So forget Venezuela: think KSA bribery. At this time, most of the heavy, sour stuff is coming from KSA — and ONLY KSA.
As for Venezuela: they bought their OWN refineries. So, there’s not a whole lot of decision making involved. (Duh!)
What animated the Saudis to drop their shorts: fracking was about to DESTROY their heavy, sour, exports to America. The ‘crack spread’ was becoming that great.
For the less than naive: this price cutting program originated with Exxon-Mobil and Chevron! (Guess who brings the brains to the negotiations!)
Both giants are getting castrated by fracking. Neither has had ANY success replicating the ‘minors.’
The word is: PANIC.
Between Chevron and Exxon-Mobile — and KSA — what say you?
U.S. government schools have been orchestrating the stupidity of Americans for a very long time. Well, ignorance. Nothing new here.
Does anyone expect their cats, dogs, and other pets to think better than humans?
If so, has anyone put guns on them so they become mobile defense sentry turrets?
The government is treating the serfs and slaves as appropriate.
Thanks Matthew M, that was interesting and informative. Where can one learn more?
to answer mezzrow:
res ipsa loquitur tabula in naufragio
Keystone is a non issue as transcanada goes forward regardless
ie. they are using the pipes to move oil from other areas, and are using rail to move the oil over the border into the pipe. they are also building a section to the ocean for selling the oil to China and other countries, as they do not have laws against exporting oil, like the US does.
however..
on another note, notice the language of this:
and
This might seem like a good thing till you consider the fact that for the past two years, rumored internment camps were being built in every state by the Federal Government
but of course since they are on bases, closed prisons, and other such places, we refuse to acknowlege it until they put up a sign that says “internment camp here” with a big white arrow and a map with a red arrow saying “you are here”
just think how easy it was for hitler to hide camps in plain sight while the public only believed what they knew was their after the war when forced to see what was really going on. until that point, a huge proportion of them refused to believe that such camps existed, or were being used the way they were. (many others knew better, knew what was going on, and like Topf, even were complicit in doing business and improving the processes there)
Democrats think the American people (or at least the voters of Louisiana) are really, really, really stupid.
Well, that and the fact that most of the media will still circle the wagons around the Dems. If the Dems didn’t have the cover that most of the media gave them, Obama wouldn’t have been re-elected in the first place.
There are always multiple ways to attribute motives to others. Given that we don’t necessarily know WHY they do what they do, attributing whatever motives we like is a free, fun game that anyone can play.
Here a new one. Sen. Landrieu said “Please, my fellow Democrats, help me fool my constituents into letting me keep my job! They’re stupid enough to buy it, I assure you!” The reply was: “No, Mary, we don’t think your constituents are THAT stupid, no matter what Gruber says… and this move is so transparent that it could splash back on the rest of us. Good luck finding a new job.”