Yesterday, in its latest exercise in wasting time, the Republican-led U.S. House of Representatives voted on H.R. 3, the “Northern Route Approval Act.” H.R. 3’s primary stated purpose is to “approve the construction, operation, and maintenance of the Keystone XL pipeline.” The bill, which likely will not pass the Senate and which President Obama has vowed to veto on separation-of-powers grounds, would eliminate the need for Presidential permitting of the Keystone XL project, but only the Keystone XL project.
The bill passed the House by a vote of 241 to 175. 222 Republicans voted in favor, joined by 19 Democrats. One Republican, Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan, voted “present,” explaining his vote later in this tweet:
Keystone bill violated Rule of Law by exempting one entity from laws every similar entity must follow. I favor general dereg, not privilege.
(Amash later tweeted: “I support Keystone project moving forward…”)
The entire New England House delegation (except Ed Markey, who was campaigning in West Roxbury and did not vote) voted against the bill. Notably, that included Steve Lynch, who has supported Keystone XL in the past and whose Senate campaign re-iterated that support before hedging in early April.
My question is this: with the Senate primary now behind us, what does it mean? Is Rep. Lynch simply against changing the process (i.e. keep the Presidential permitting system intact), or has he reconsidered his position on the Keystone XL project itself? Rep. Lynch’s Congressional website does not mention support of Keystone XL on its “Energy/Environment” page, and the people in his office weren’t able to tell me.
I feel a great disturbance in the force, as if a single voice from Waltham cried out, and was silenced.
Lynch now time travel and vote for NAFTA?
This in no way changes the low opinion I have of Lynch.
what it means yet. Anyway I think the action on Keystone XL will largely be in the executive branch, not with Congress. This is just posturing by the House Republicans. Quelle surprise!
Plenty of other critiques of Lynch.
I have been expressing my disgust for Lynch here and elsewhere for many months because I am someone with a pre-existing condition, I live in Lynch’s district, and I hate his vote against the ACA. However, because of the need to rally behind Markey, I have (with this one exception) put my disgust on a back burner for now and as someone else said “Not to be a sore winner” after supporting Markey (really more 50/50 opposing Lynch) from the very beginning.
If Obama can’t stand up to House Republicans why will he stand up to the Canadians?
I’m not particularlly a fan of Lynch myself, but I suppose I would be more so bothered if I lived in his Congressional District.
This link explains why Lynch voted the way he did.