Hillary Clinton and the XL Pipeline

Dear Friends,

It is well established that Hillary Clinton refuses to say what her position is on the Keystone XL Pipeline.  I find her reluctance to disclose her position a really bad sign and support for my position that she is a opportunist and not someone with strongly held views that she will support.  A little research turns up some interesting stories.  Here are some in chronological order.

There was an article in The Daily Beast just about two years ago entitled "Clinton's Environmental Failure" (here).  I found this paragraph from that article particularly interesting:

But the rumor is that Clinton’s State Department is nonetheless about to recommend approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline, which the top climate scientists in the nation have unanimously called a terrible idea. As far as I know, though, Clinton’s subordinates haven’t reached out to ask them why. For more than a year now, it’s been one of Washington’s worst-kept secrets that Clinton wants the pipeline approved. And why not? Its builder, TransCanada, hired her old deputy campaign manager as its chief lobbyist and gave lobbying contracts to several of her big bundlers. Leaked emails show embassy officials rooting on the project; it’s classic D.C. insiderism. (And, weirdly, her rumored successor is just as involved—Susan Rice has millions in stock in TransCanada and other Canadian energy companies.)

The next is an article in Politifact.com from March 5, 2014 entitled "Do Bill Clinton and George Bush Support the Keystone XL Pipeline" (here).  Apparently the American Petroleum Institute ran an ad in several states indicating that while there is gridlock in Washington, the Keystone XL Pipeline was an issue that had bipartisan support and specifically indicated that Bill Clinton and George Bush both supported it.  The article traces Bill Clinton's support to a speech he gave that appears to support the pipeline and indicates that Bill Clinton has never indicated that he does not support the pipeline.  Since I approach both Bill and Hillary Clinton with a rather cynical attitude that they are both opportunists and do not want to take positions, the language used in the speech is ambiguous.  I suspect Bill Clinton is trying to sit on the fence and be able to say he supported it or he did not depending on how the wind blows in the future.

There are two very recent articles about a speech that Secretary Clinton gave to the League of Conservation Voters, a group that is strongly opposed to the Keystone XL Pipeline.  The CBS news article (here) focused on Secretary Clinton's refusal to comment on the pipeline and the fact that just before that dinner she had attended a fundraiser for Senator Landrieu who is a very vocal proponent of the Keystone XL Pipeline.  In fact her entire strategy for winning re-election (which did not work) was to show how supportive she was of the pipeline.  The Think Progress article (here) in addition to talking about Secretary Clinton's refusal to take a position of the Keystone XL Pipeline focused on her references to fracking.  She did not use the work fracking and her words were at best platitudes about the potential problems with extraction of shale gas.  There was no outright condemnation of fracking.

I am forced to conclude that on two issues that I feel are critical to the future of the world, Secretary Clinton is failing to take a strong pro-environment stance and failing to be the leader that we need.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal