Hillary Clinton has a Keystone XL problem

After six years of delays, the Keystone XL pipeline still hasn't been approved or rejected. Hillary Clinton's entry into the 2016 presidential race has renewed calls for the former secretary of State to take a stand on the divisive issue.

|
Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP
Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks at an event hosted by the Center for American Progress in March. Ms. Clinton announced her candidacy for president on Sunday.

Hillary Clinton announced Sunday that she will run for president in 2016, and environmental groups are welcoming her to the race with the first of what could be many Keystone XL protests.

The controversial pipeline has become a litmus test for environmentalists concerned that Ms. Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner, won’t take a bold enough stance to fight climate change. As Secretary of State, Clinton said she was “inclined” to sign-off on the pipeline, which would carry emissions-heavy oil sands from Alberta to US Gulf Coast refineries. Since then, Clinton has remained silent on Keystone XL, while the Obama administration has spent six years deciding whether to approve or reject it. A final decision, which could come in weeks or months, would take some of the heat off Clinton.

But for now, the pressure’s on: Climate activism group 350.org, which helped catapult Keystone XL into the limelight as a symbol of the contemporary environmental movement, is spearheading a protest outside Clinton’s Brooklyn campaign headquarters Monday.

“We all remember when Clinton said she was 'inclined' to approve Keystone XL. If the pipeline goes through, she'll shoulder part of the blame, and this protest today will be just a small taste of actions to come,” Jamie Henn, spokesperson for 350 Action, told the Monitor in an email Monday. “Clinton is saying many of the right things on climate – Keystone XL is an easy way to start doing the right thing.”

Clinton might seem an unlikely target, given the strong marks she has received from other environmental groups. But with few Democratic challengers and a Republican field that questions the science of climate change, green groups are training their eyes on Clinton, who they believe could take a more vocal stand against climate change. According to an ABC News poll, 59 percent of Americans say they “want the next president to be someone who favors government action to address climate change,” while 58 percent call climate change an important issue.

Environmentalists are also mindful that Obama’s environmental legacy – including plans to slash US power plant emissions 30 percent by 2030, and his work toward a binding international climate accord – will be carried about by his successor.

 

“With the implementation of the Clean Power Plan and critical climate negotiations in Paris on the horizon, climate action will be a major theme in the 2016 election,” Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, an environmental group, said in a statement Sunday. “This election, Secretary Clinton has the opportunity to build on her strong environmental record, bring real leadership to the climate fight, and lay out her plan to grow the American clean energy economy.”

As Brune suggests, it’s not as if Clinton is against action on climate change. In December she vowed to protect Obama’s EPA emissions cuts “at all costs,” and last summer she called global warming “the most consequential, urgent, sweeping collection of challenges we face as a nation and a world” at Democratic Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid’s Clean Energy Summit in Nevada. Another point in Clinton’s favor for environmentalists is that John Podesta, the architect of Obama’s climate strategy, is serving as Clinton’s campaign chairman.

Still, environmental groups are eager for Clinton to make her specific environmental positions known – especially on Keystone, which was in her bailiwick as Secretary of State. The pipeline requires State Department approval because it crosses the US-Canada border.

Environmentalists and many Democrats say Keystone XL would be a climate disaster, since fossil fuel emissions are driving global warming. The State Department’s own analysis of the project found it was unlikely to have much of an impact from either an economic or environmental standpoint.

The oil industry and other pipeline backers – including most Republicans and some Democrats – argue that the pipeline could create jobs and reduce US reliance on oil from the volatile Middle East.

And now that Clinton has announced her candidacy, environmental activists say it’s time to stake out a position.

“That unwillingness to take a position on something, it's significantly more indefensible when you're a declared presidential candidate,” 350.org spokesperson Karthik Ganapathy told Business Insider last week. "It's even more indefensible when Ted Cruz and Rand Paul have taken a position on it when you, as the Democratic front-runner, have not."

Others have called on Clinton to take up a bevy of other environmental causes. Friday environmental groups sent a letter urging her to oppose fracking, the oil and gas drilling technique that has propelled the US energy boom. New York state has banned fracking amid safety and health concerns.

But the Sunday launch of Clinton’s campaign – with a YouTube video called “Getting Started” – was light on details. And that means Keystone is still a problem for Clinton, at least as long as President Obama declines to approve or reject it.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Hillary Clinton has a Keystone XL problem
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Energy/2015/0413/Hillary-Clinton-has-a-Keystone-XL-problem
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe