Keystone pipeline pumping station, Nebraska (cc photo: Shannon Ramos)
Washington Post reporter Juliet Eilperin (7/29/13) noticed an interesting part of a recent New York Times interview with Barack Obama, where he discussed the Keystone pipeline:
In the interview, which was posted online Saturday night, Obama questioned the project’s economic benefits, saying “there is no evidence” to the Republican argument that “this would be a big jobs generator.”
“And my hope would be that any reporter who is looking at the facts would take the time to confirm that the most realistic estimates are this might create maybe 2,000 jobs during the construction of the pipeline–which might take a year or two–and then after that we’re talking about somewhere between 50 and 100 [chuckles] jobs in a economy of 150 million working people,” Obama added.
So Keystone probably won’t create many jobs–that’s something we’ve been pointing out here on the FAIR Blog (e.g., 1/25/12) for a long time now, that coverage too often just repeated claims, often from Republicans, about the number of jobs likely to be created by the project. Back to the Post piece:
He also suggested that the pipeline would not lower gas prices in the U.S., and could actually increase them in the Midwest, an argument buttressed by recent fluctuations in the crude oil market.
“So what we also know is, is that that oil is going to be piped down to the Gulf to be sold on the world oil markets, so it does not bring down gas prices here in the United States,” Obama said. “In fact, it might actually cause some gas prices in the Midwest to go up where currently they can’t ship some of that oil to world markets.”
Oil is sold on a global market–and that makes it very unlikely that the tar sands oil will do much to lower gas prices in the United States. That’s a fact often missing from Keystone coverage, as Dean Baker and others (including FAIR Blog—8/23/12) have pointed out for years.
It’s not likely that coverage of these energy issues is going to change much because of what Obama is saying–nor are his comments necessarily indicative of whether he’ll approve the Keystone pipeline or not. But he’s evidently doing media criticism.
One of the most intriguing things about elected officials is the question of whether or not they have any kind of grasp of the issues at hand when the act on them in, presumably, our name. It appears that Obie has some glimmer of such. Thus, what galls is that in the face of such understanding he then goes and does what one would if he had no such grasp. He can’t say he didn’t know. For the rest of us, I cite a title that is also a call to action, “If You Love This Planet” …
“It’s not likely that coverage of these energy issues is going to change much because of what Obama is saying–nor are his comments necessarily indicative of whether he’ll approve the Keystone pipeline or not. But he’s evidently doing media criticism.”
Excuse me, Obama Who? Are we talking about the same one as the guy who is President of Whatzitzname?
Whoever this is quoting, I say let him criticize the press all he wants. Maybe even encourage it. If that is the only leftist accomplishment of his while he is in office, I’d support it.
Now if we could just get him to recognize the flaws in PPACA, we could REALLY get someplace…
Obama sometimes throws crumbs to the base in his speeches offering a glimmer of hope.
Any one who thinks developing oil and gas with our friends on this continent would not be a positive thing for us….as opposed to being attached to the middle east tit is a stone cold moron.I remember the arguments against development in the Dakotas.It wont bring jobs,it wont help the nation,it wont help the state,and it will in the end raise gas prices.So What moron believed that?Sometimes you folks on the left are so wrong……that it beggars belief.
Wow, Michael e. It’s like you didn’t even read the article… let alone the links embedded in it.
Teejay Im saying I disregard the whole argument as stupid,nuanced,and short sighted.DRILL BABY DRILL!!!!!!!!