Boehner Survives Largest Intra-Party Revolt in 150 Years

Frankly, I can stand John Boehner who among other things I view as a liar and a to hypocrite who claims to be a devote Catholic yet pushes a GOP agenda which is the antithesis of the Gospel message and the Catholic Church's social ministry agenda.   Thus, the only reason why I can try to stomach his return to the position of Speaker of the House is that the far right alternatives would have been even worse.   Today, the attempt by such far right extremists failed when they were unable to force the speakership vote to a second ballot.  The Washington Post looks at todya's events.  Here are excerpts:

Republicans took full control of Congress on Tuesday, but — even on a day of happy ceremony — GOP leaders were reminded of the limits of their power, first by a veto threat from the president and then by a historic rebellion by conservatives in the House.

The day’s real drama was, instead, in the House. There, Republican control was not in doubt: After last fall’s electoral victories, the GOP has 246 of the chamber’s 435 seats, its largest majority since the 1940s.  What was in doubt was which Republican would lead. 

When a clerk called the roll, 24 Republicans voted for a candidate other than incumbent Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio). The plotters couldn’t agree on their own candidate: they voted for each other, for sitting senators, even for former secretary of state Colin L. Powell.

In the end, their rebellion was not enough to unseat Boehner: The speaker won on the first round with 216 votes, 11 more than he needed. But it was far larger than a similar coup attempt against Boehner in 2013. In fact, it was the largest rebellion by a party against its incumbent speaker since the Civil War.

Still, even before the day’s ceremonies were over, there was a sign of a coming fight with President Obama. One of the new Congress’s top legislative priorities is a bill to authorize the construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline. But Tuesday, a spokesman said Obama would veto such a bill, believing that it circumvents an established process for approving large pipeline projects.

The effort to depose Boehner was led by a group of hard-right conservatives and libertarians, who did not believe the speaker was doing enough to fight Obama over spending and executive power.

Their intent was not to beat Boehner outright. It was to humiliate him, by splintering the party so that no Republican won on the first vote. 

While the revolt failed, it should send Boehner and the GOP establishment a message that it may be very difficult to govern going forward with the far right extremist elements of the GOP sulking and looking to push for extreme positions as the sessions rolls out.  

Keystone Pipeline Goes Down to Defeat in U.S. Senate

While tonight's vote may seal the fate of Mary Landrieu (D-La.)in her upcoming run off election, the at least temporary defeat of the Keystone Pipeline is a win for the American people despite the PR efforts of the Koch brothers and other fossil fuel industry hacks and their political prostitutes.  The tar sands from which hydrocarbons to be transported by the Keystone Pipeline are produced are among the most environmentally damaging.  Yes, Canada and foul individuals like the Kochs would benefit from the pipeline, but if one cares anything about air pollution not to mention the dangers of pipelines in general, this is NOT something sane Americans should want.  And I say this as a former in-house attorney for an large oil company with knowledge of the oil and gas industry.  I would further add that America needs to reduce its dependence on oil and gas, not increase it. Here are highlights from the Washington Post on tonight's vote:

In a dramatic vote, the Senate rejected a controversial new energy pipeline Tuesday evening, dealing a serious blow to the re-election prospects of Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and leaving Republicans itching for a fight next year on the issue. 

On a 59 to 41 vote, Landrieu lost her bid to pass legislation meant to compel the Obama White House to approve the nearly 1,700-mile, $7.6 billion Keystone XL pipeline, which if built would deliver 830,000 barrels of oil a day from western Canada into the American heartland.

Already six years in the making, the Keystone fight has become the rallying cry for Landrieu, a three-term senator facing a run-off election Dec. 6. For the past week she has placed a political bet on her ability to pass the legislation as a demonstration of her clout in the Senate.

Supporters said the new pipeline would lead to a more efficient delivery of oil into the domestic markets, helping boost the national economy by creating tens of thousands of jobs along the construction of the pipeline. Opponents said that the project would be harvesting oil from the environmentally dirty tar sands in Canada, leading to too many health risks and coming at a time when other domestic oil production has already shrunk gas prices to less than $3 a gallon in many regions.

A man identified as Greg Graycloud, with the Lakota Tribe in South Dakota, began chanting loudly after the vote ended. He was removed from the Senate Chamber by U.S. Capitol Police officers. Four other people opposed to the pipeline were also removed for speaking out.

Before Tuesday night’s vote, the White House was careful not to issue a veto threat even as officials made it clear Obama was likely to invoke one should the measure pass the Senate.

“It certainly is a piece of legislation that the president doesn’t support, because the president believes that this is something that should be determined through the State Department – a process that is in place to evaluate projects like this,” said White House press secretary Josh Earnest, adding that Obama’s senior advisers have recommended a veto on “similar pieces of legislation” that have been introduced in the past.

The New Oil Crisis: Exploding Trains

click image to enlarge

As the residents of Lynchburg, Virginia, recently found out, there is a dangerous side to America's surging oil production: trains carry large cargoes of oil in often aging tank cars that set the stage for a fiery conflagration in the event of a derailment.  Thankfully, no one died in Lynchburg, but in other places not everyone has been so lucky.  While Virginia is investigating the cause of the Lynchburg crash the trains continue to roll raising the specter of other possible disasters.  With refineries in the area and its large port facilities, Hampton Roads is often a destination for these potentially catastrophic cargoes.  A lengthy piece in Politico looks at the growing danger.  Here are highlights (read the entire piece):

Communities throughout the U.S. and Canada are waking up to the dark side of North America’s energy boom: Trains hauling crude oil are crashing, exploding and spilling in record numbers as a fast-growing industry outpaces the federal government’s oversight.

In the 11 months since a runaway oil train derailed in the middle of a small town in Quebec, incinerating 47 people, the rolling virtual pipelines have unleashed crude oil into an Alabama swamp, forced more than 1,000 North Dakota residents to evacuate, dangled from a bridge in Philadelphia and smashed into an industrial building near Pittsburgh. The latest serious accident was April’s fiery crash in Lynchburg, Virginia, where even the mayor had been unaware oil was rolling through his city.

These dangerous moments on the rails raise questions about the safety of transporting increasing amounts of oil in mile-long chains of tank cars, some of them decades old. Community leaders and activists from Oregon to Alabama to Albany call the trains a disaster waiting to happen — despite the Department of Transportation’s efforts to play catchup through a series of emergency orders, agreements with industry and proposed regulations being reviewed by the White House.

A POLITICO analysis of federal data from more than 400 oil-train incidents since 1971 shows that a once-uncommon threat has escalated dramatically in the past five years:

• This year has already shattered the record for property damage from U.S. oil-train accidents, with a toll exceeding $10 million through mid-May — nearly triple the damage for all of 2013. The number of incidents so far this year — 70 — is also on pace to set a record.
• Almost every region of the U.S. has been touched by an oil-train incident. These episodes are spreading as more refineries take crude from production hot spots like North Dakota’s Bakken region and western Canada, while companies from California and Washington state to Missouri, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Florida build or expand terminals for moving oil from trains to barges, trucks or pipelines.

“The boom in domestic oil production has turned many railways and small communities across our country into de facto oil pipelines, and the gold-rush-type phenomenon has unfortunately put our regulators behind the eight ball,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who has been pushing for stricter safety and disclosure rules. “It has become abundantly clear that there are a whole slew of freight rail safety measures that, while for many years have been moving through the gears of bureaucracy, must now be approved and implemented in haste.”

Like the oil boom itself, the surge in oil-train traffic has come much faster than anyone expected. Meanwhile, the trains face less onerous regulations than other ways of moving oil, including pipelines like TransCanada’s Keystone XL project.

Keystone, which would carry oil from Alberta to the Gulf Coast, has waited more than five years for a permit from the Obama administration while provoking a national debate about climate change. But no White House approval was needed for all the trains carrying Canadian oil into the United States. In fact, freight railroads in the U.S. are considered “common carriers” for hazardous materials, meaning they can’t refuse to ship it as long as it meets federal guidelines.

Meanwhile, the oil train business is primed to get bigger. Even TransCanada might start using rail to ship oil to the U.S. while waiting for Keystone to get the green light, CEO Russ Girling said in an interview in May — despite agreeing that trains are a costlier and potentially more dangerous option.

“If anybody thinks that is a better idea, that’s delusional,” Girling said.