Nebraska Governor returns campaign donation to TransCanada and worries about water impact of oil sands pipeline

by Luiza Ch. Savage

Hillary Clinton says she is inclined to approve TransCanada’s proposed Keystone XL pipeline that would bring oil sands production into the US as far as Texas.

Meanwhile, Nebraska governor Dave Heineman has written to Clinton expressing his concerns about impacts on water in his state. He writes that, “Almost 300 miles of the proposed pipeline will come through Nebraska and be situated directly over the Ogallala Aquifer. This aquifer provides water to farmers and ranchers of Nebraska to raise livestock and grow crops.” … “Nebraskans are concerned that the proposed pipeline route could contaminate the Ogallala Aquifer and I share that concern.” In the letter dated Oct. 12, he asks for a thorough review and for the State Dept. to ensure that it is “properly constructed, carefully operated, and well maintatined so that Nebraska’s natural resources are protected.” The letter was obtained by the National Wildlife Federation.

Heineman is a Republican who is running for reelection on Nov. 2. (His seat is considered safe.) He recently gave back a $2,500 campaign donation from TransCanada because donations from foreigners are banned under US election finance laws. Nonetheless, the Nebraska Democratic Party is now calling for an investigation.

 

 




Browse

Nebraska Governor returns campaign donation to TransCanada and worries about water impact of oil sands pipeline

  1. Oh goooood planning

    'About 27 percent of the irrigated land in the United States overlies this aquifer system, which yields about 30 percent of the nation's ground water used for irrigation. In addition, the aquifer system provides drinking water to 82 percent of the people who live within the aquifer boundary'

    • and a pipeline threatens this how? Remember Emily, a pipeline is not the same as a deepwater rig – I know a glibby, like yourself, accepts the sort of propaganda of fear put out by Green Peace and Co. – but lets have an informed adult debate.

      • Who cares what Emily thinks? It's the Republican candidate who is afraid of the pipeline. He must be a member of Green Peace!

        • I am questioning the 'fear'

  2. Maybe if we ever so helpfully built a water pipeline in tandem ….

  3. How come TransCanada didn't know they couldn't donate to an American political campaign? It looks like they were trying to bribe somebody.

    • they are incorporated in Delaware

  4. I find it interesting that the Dems are resorting to isolationist fear tactics – man, turning the dial about 100 years – interesting, I guess the whole 'change' message is out of the question.

  5. Having posted all of that, if I was an American I would want foreign interests out of my democratic elections/policy building as well – (think avaaz.org),

    But it is pretty ironic that Obama would have significant Wall Street Binge players in his adminitration, and policy that did very little to curb Wall Street excess – essentially nothing for people losing their houses, jobs, and livelihood.

    • I found the US Chamber of Commerce's rebuttal to be very partisan, but at this point, I'm kind of ready to pop some corn and watch it all unfold. Sometimes, it's like "bizarro world" in the US. The tea party candidates are taking back the country but planning to extend generous tax cuts to the richest 1%, the only Obama admin. move the tea party supports is how he expanded the war on terror, and allegations of foreign influence are not worthy of investigation. Having said that, the hope and change message of 2008 is dead.

      Even when the Dems lose their majority in the house, how much difference will it really make? I look forward to a Republican in the WH in 2012 — mainly because I want to see if the Tea Party deflates and disappears. Plus, Republicans never bother with "buy American" legislation and that is good for us.

  6. Yeah, you are right, and I don't want to suggest money pumped in by private interests is a good thing – or completely legitimate.

    I am questioning fear-mongering that seems to take place everywhere – trade is good (especially among neighbours) – questioning huge corporations is a really good thing – promoting fear is bad.

    • I think it's gone past the point of return. One could argue it started with the wacky 2000 election, but the tenor of the past couple of years tells me there's a pimple that needs to burst.

      I'm proud to live in a country that didn't need to bail out its wealthiest citizens.

      • Why would are wealthiest citizens need a bailout ?- they own it all – they love the system more than anyone. They love the anger from the right focused on the garbageman who gets 20-30 bucks an hour and 3-4 weeks vacation while they take whatever they want. – who is on welfare?

        • They shouldn't need a bailout, but in the US they gambled and lost. Instead of taking on the chin, they used their well-placed connections to get congress to bail them out. They privatize gains and socialize losses — under both of the last two administrations. Also under Reagan with the relatively quaint Savings and Loans scandal.

          Anyways, we seem to be furiously agreeing with each other, so I'll cut it short.

  7. The Dems have been using foreign donations as a fear tactic all over the US –

    from CBS News
    "'Democrats and their supporters appear convinced that tying Republican outside groups to shadowy foreign donors is a successful strategy for rallying their base in the midterm elections. The repeated attacks come despite the fact that Democrats do not have solid proof to back up the allegations."

    from New York Times on D.N.C. attacks on US Chamber of Commerce:

    “The D.N.C. is going to exhaust itself trying so hard to change the political conversation,” Thomas J. Collamore, the chamber's senior vice president of communications and strategy, said in a statement. “Its ad attacking the U.S. Chamber is a blatant attempt to avoid a serious discussion of Americans' top priority — creating jobs and growing the economy. The ad is ridiculous and false.”

    • from the Baltimore Sun:

      "The Democratic National Commitee is using the same sort of tactic and logic that Sen. Joe McCarthy used in the 1950s: Level a headline-grabbing and unsubstantiated charge, like the State Department is filled with communists, and then say it is up to the State Department and the employees so charged to prove it is not true.

      So much for hope and change; this is the politics of fear, slander and divisiveness on the eve of an election that looks as if it could deliver a damning verdict on the first two years of the Obama administration"

      • LA Times;

        "In a potential sign of Democratic unease with the White House midterm political strategy, some of President Obama's allies have begun to question his sustained attack on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which has long claimed bipartisanship but is being increasingly identified as a GOP ally.

        Some Democrats on Capitol Hill worry that the White House is going too far in charging that the politically powerful business lobby may be using foreign money to fuel its election efforts. The charge ignites strong feelings among job-hungry voters. But Democrats are concerned that it may be overstated and could harm moderate Democrats in swing districts."

        Washington Post:

        "The White House intensified its attacks Sunday on the powerful U.S. Chamber of Commerce for its alleged ties to foreign donors, part of an escalating Democratic effort to link Republican allies with corporate and overseas interests ahead of the November midterm elections. "

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *