Opponents of the Keystone XL pipeline on Monday criticized efforts by TransCanada to recoup $15 billion from American taxpayers in the wake of President Barack Obama’s decision to reject the project.
Critics of the failed $8 billion pipeline, which would have carried as many as 830,000 barrels of crude oil daily, argue the move highlights how foreign corporations can use trade agreements to influence U.S. domestic environmental policies. They also took the opportunity to criticize Obama’s proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership, a 12-nation trade agreement.
“TransCanada is trying to bully the American taxpayers and President Obama and any future president in that they should not dare mess with big oil,†Jane Kleeb, founder of Bold Nebraska and the multi-state Bold Alliance,Ìýsaid Monday during a conference call with three other activist groups responding to the case.
People are also reading…
TransCanada filed late Friday seeking reparations through arbitration allowed under a provision of the North American Free Trade Agreement. The company argues it had every reason to believe the pipeline would gain approval and that it was rejected due to politics rather than substance.
In the filing, TransCanada says the Obama administration repeatedly delayed deciding whether to OK construction across the border between the United States and Canada, drawing the approval process out over seven years and leaving the company no choice but to continue spending money on it. In that time, the Keystone XL became the focus of intense political controversy and a rallying point for environmental groups frustrated with a lack of meaningful steps from Obama to curb greenhouse gas emissions responsible for global warming.
“President Obama wanted to prove his Administration’s environmental credentials to a vocal activist constituency,†TransCanada says in the paperwork. “Keystone XL was no longer just part of the network of hundreds of thousands of miles of other oil pipelines crisscrossing the United States, but a symbol of the entire oil industry.â€
Nebraska was often at the center of the controversy as an alliance of landowners, environmentalists and American Indians rallied to oppose construction. They railed about property rights, the danger of an oil leak to the Ogallala Aquifer, damage to Canadian wilderness and the need to curb reliance on dirty fossil fuels.
Obama rejected the cross-border permit in November, saying it wasn’t in the nation’s best interest for the 36-inch-diameter pipeline to be built because of the urgency of climate change and the need for the United States to be a leader on the issue.
In response, TransCanada in January issued notice of its intent to file a NAFTA claim against the United States, a move that could leave U.S. taxpayers on the hook for monetary damages although the U.S. is undefeated in defending against such cases. The Calgary, Alberta-basedÌýcompany also filed a federal lawsuit seeking to overturn Obama's decision.
The NAFTA process could take years and would be heard by a three-person tribunal. TransCanada said earlier this year it spent $3.1 billion on the Keystone XL project. The $15 billion it is seeking to recoup takes into account what it says is the lost value of its investments and economic return.
Opponents of the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership are holding the case up as another in a laundry list of reasons for opposing the free trade agreement between the U.S. and 11 other Pacific Rim nations.
It has become a political flashpoint on its own, with presidential hopefuls Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders all openly hostile to it.
Passage of the agreement could let thousands more companies follow in TransCanada’s steps, undermining efforts to tackle climate change and other environmental issues, Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune said during the Monday conference call.Ìý
“These trade rules give extreme power to already deep-pocketed corporations that want to challenge the laws that keep us safe and keep us healthy,†Brune said. “We need a new model of trade that doesn’t undermine our commitment to improve air and water quality, that doesn’t undermine our ability to fight for climate change, that doesn’t undermine our democracy.â€
Pro-trade business and many agricultural groups have rallied behind the trade proposal, which stands to significantly increase exports of goods like dairy, beef, pork and rice to places such as Japan and Vietnam.
Trans-Pacific Partnership supporters argue the agreement supports labor standards abroad and addresses environmental issues like illegal logging and over fishing as well as bolsters relationships with member nations.Ìý
With the next president likely to scrap the agreement and election year politics turning it into a political football, its most likely chance for passage is during the 2016 lame duck session when lawmakers return to Washington after Nov. 8
The rejected northern portion of the Keystone XL would have spanned 1,179 miles beginning in Hardisty, Alberta, and extending south to Steele City on Nebraska’s southern border where it would meet up with a network of existing pipelines.
