that is what transcanada is doing. six families in south dakota are in court with transcanada, trying to protect their land. as a nation, we are facing our next moon challenge. energy is our moon that challenge. when i looked at my three little girls, i want them to know that i did everything i could to fight for sustainable energy. i know each of you want that as well. we want energy that is revitalizing our communities, not putting them at risk. i know as americans that we can meet this challenge. we can do right by landowners and workers. we are americans, and we can do this together. >> thank you. at this time, i want to thank all of you for your testimony. it is very insightful. it is time to begin our questions. i yield to the gentleman from illinois for five minutes. >> thank you for the courtesy of letting me go rapidly, because i am going to board a plane. when i fly from st. louis, it is heavy crude from canadian oil sands that is piped down to my comical philips refinery that is piped to the -- conocophillip

transcanada is looking at a $7 billion investment. it is a tremendous opportunity not only for jobs now but what they will bring in. to delay this further in these economic times is just unfortunate. we feel like we don't want this country to miss the opportunity. host: this program works with your calls and comments and e- mails and questions so we ask you to do so in a number of ways. send us an e-mail or joined the conversation on line. we will get to your calls in a moment. one of the related comments from this tweet -- guest: that question has come up often get a lot of people raising the u.s. simply wants to export or refined products. the oil primarily is going to stay here. if you look at what the american demand is and what we need, how are refineries are not -- how they not only are retrofitted but designed to produce the products coming from oil sands, of course the companies want to be the to compete globally and of the global marketplace that dictates oil prices require or there is a need to exports of crude oil, that may

that is what transcanada is doing. six families right now in south dakota are in court with transcanada trying to protect their land. as a nation we are facing our next moon challenge. energy is our moon challenge. and when i look at my three little girls, i want to make sure that they know that i as their mom did everything i can to fight for sustainable energy, and i know each of you want to do that as well. we want energy that is revitalizing our communities, not putting them at risk. and i know as americans that we can meet this challenge. we can do right by landowners. we can do right by workers. because we are americans and we can do this together. thank you. >> thank you. at this time we'll, i want to thank all of you for your testimony. very insightful. at this time to begin our questions i would yield to the gentleman from illinois. you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate the courtesy letting me go rapidly because i'm going to board a plane and that plane that actually, wh

that is what transcanada is doing. six families in south dakota are in court with transcanada trying to protect their land. as a nation, we are facing our next moon challenge. energy is our moon challenge. when i looked at my three little girls, i want to make sure that i, as their mom, did everything i could to buy it for sustainable energy. i know each of you want to do that as well. we want energy that revitalizes our communities, not puts them at risk. i know that as americans we can meet these challenges. we can do right by landowners and workers because we are americans and we can do this together. thank you. quite thank you. at this time i want to thank all of you for your testimony. it is very insightful. at this time, i will yield to the gentleman from illinois. you are recognized for five minutes. >> think you, mr. chairman. i am going to board a plane. that plane -- actually when i fly from st. louis -- it is heavy crude from canada and that is already piped down to my refinery which is refined there and the

transcanada is looking at a $7 billion investment. it is a tremendous opportunity not only for jobs now but what they will bring in. to delay this further in these economic times is just unfortunate. we feel like we don't want this country to miss the opportunity. host: this program works with your calls and comments and e- mails and questions so we ask you to do so in a number of ways. send us an e-mail or joined the conversation on line. we will get to your calls in a moment. one of the related comments from this tweet -- guest: that question has come up often get a lot of people raising the u.s. simply wants to export or refined products. the oil primarily is going to stay here. if you look at what the american demand is and what we need, how are refineries are not -- how they not only are retrofitted but designed to produce the products coming from oil sands, of course the companies want to be the to compete globally and of the global marketplace that dictates oil prices require or there is a need to exports of crude oil, that may

>> as i said earlier, transcanada does not produce 1 barrel of oil. our entire business is transporting that oil. that is a question better put to our shippers who are largely refiners and producers and largely american companies. >> would you agree to put a prohibition on re-export into your contracts with these refineries to ensure that the re-export does not occur? that would make all of us feel a lot better. >> if the concern that we are talking about is energy security for the u.s., if the u.s. government let's put that kind of vague criteria on the approval of a pipeline, i would argue that would actually reduce the energy security benefits to the u.s.. as i said, the u.s. is by far the world's largest consumer of refined products. >> we're just saying that your willingly contract in to keep the oil here. will you commit to the redundancy of having it put on paper as a condition? if you say that will happen anyway, you are agreeing that that is the way it will happen. do you agree to put on paper what you say will happen in terms of keeping the

i don't know whether transcanada has aligned. >> if that ran to the port of vancouver.i don't know. >> i have a map that says there is a pipeline that runs to the canadian west coast from the alberta oil sands i believe it is about 300 barrels a day. >> brenau california gets some capacity. >> there are proposals for expansion. >> is the purpose of that vancouver at least in part the purpose of the export? it's not for the domestic -- some of that goes to asia is that not correct? >> there is some going to china. >> so the idea that because of the delay canada is now looking at the chinese market. that's not true. as a matter of fact, the dent in the china market and the reason to book is not anything to do with the delay. it has to do with the fact they are the fastest-growing market in the world, and has enormous potential and if you are an oil exporter in that business that is a market you don't look at, isn't it, just reasonably? you didn't assert that, the chairman did. >> the gentleman would yield it was not me asserting that it was the prime minister of canada as

transcanada paid for it.e getting these wacky, 10,000, 20,000 numbers. >> i would love to ask the u.s. labor department, who is in charge of jobs and the economy in the united states, to estimate how much jobs they think it's going to create. >> rhonda, let me ask you, you mentioned national security. sorry, that was alicea menendez before. its alex wagner again. is the environment, global warming and climate change, not also an issue of national security that should be factored in here. bill mckiben, the noted scientist and environmentally said right now they have a straw into that formation but they want to quintuple production over the next five years. they want that stuff out there and they have to have some kind of pipe to get it out. stopping keystone will buy time used for the planet to come so its senses around climate change. why is there so little attention paid to environmental issues? >> actually, alec, therealex, tt of attention paid to the environmental issues, but the reality is when we're talk

which transcanada has agreed to me.is is the most technical -- technologically advanced in state object ever proposed in a 16,000 data points along its 1661-mile road. to monitor flow rate and pressure and detect leaks. that's a sensor for every 500 repeat. i want to thank all of the witnesses for being here with us today to explore this important project, and we look forward to your testimony. and at this time i would like to yield in time and recognize the ranking member of the subcommittee, mr. rush, for his opening statement. >> i want to thank you, mr. chairman, and today we're holding a hearing to discuss ways to force the obama administration to restlessly and expeditiously make a decision on the keystone xl pipeline. even after the republican-controlled legislature and the governor in nebraska just recently voted to reroute the pipeline away from the ecological sensitive sand hills region in the district. as i understand it, mr. chairman, the bill was just signed into law two weeks ago on november 22, i might ad

to that is some language that would force the white house to provide an earlier decision on the transcanada keystone pipeline. that's going to cut across the country if it's approved. we've not seen that language. senator conrad early or late this afternoon told bloomberg reporter that that language was not problematic. that where they got stuck was trying to find the cuts to pay for the full extension of the payroll tax. and the unemployment benefits. that leads me to believe that we really want to take a look at that language to find out, is it fuzzy and just how fuzzy is it? how much wiggle room might there be for the president inside of that particular plank? gwen: how much bipartisanship is evident in these negotiations at this late date, at this latest date? >> today, they're starting from the morning, there was a sense that they were -- there was a deal within their grasp. and there was real work being done. you had leadership, commonly, reid, -- mcconnell, reid, coming out and not slamming one another. and even at the end the rhetoric was not as we have seen it before where they com

while i was governor, transcanada built the keystone pipeline.now they are working to build the keystone x.l. pipeline. well, let's walk through that time line for just a minute. first, let's start with the keystone pipeline. that project was initially applied for permit on april 19, 2006. the final environmental impact statement was issued two years later -- actually, less than two years later. it was issued january 11, 2008. so in less than two years, this project, very similar, less than two years, they got a final environmental impact statement, and within 60 days, amazingly enough, within 60 days after that final environmental impact statement, it was signed off and approved by the state department, had final approval. all right. so all within a two-year process for that project. well, now let's talk about the keystone x.l. project. all right. keystone x.l., transcanada, same company is building it. same company is building both projects. they filed for a state department presidential permit september, 2008. so that's when they filed for the

>> as i said earlier, transcanada does not produce one barrel of oil. our entire business is safely transporting oil. that would be a question that i think would be better put to our -- to our shippers who are largely refiners and producers and largely american companies. >> well, would you -- would you agree to put a prohibition on reexport into your contracts with these refinerys to ensure that reexport does not occur. you have the power to do that. and then make that a legal part of the agreement and then that would make all of us feel a lot better. would you be willing to commit to make that a of being able to use the pipeline? >> if the concern that we're talking about is energy security for the u.s. -- >> that's right. >> if the u.s. government was to put that kind of a criteria on the approval of a pipeline, what that -- i would argue that would actually reduce the energy security benefits to the u.s. because as i said, the u.s. is by far the world's largest consumer of refined products -- >> i don't understand why that reduces our security. we'r

does transcanada now have the determinants of vancouver? >> vancouver, yes.s there a line that ends in vancouver? i don't know whether transcanada has aligned. >> our tar sands product to the point of vancouver. i don't know. >> i have a map that says there is a pipeline that runs to the canadian west coast from the alberta stands right now. >> i know california gets some capacity. >> and there are proposals for expansion. >> is the purpose of the vancouver determinant at least in part the purpose of the experts? >> it's not from the -- some of that goes to asia is that not correct? >> there is some going to china. >> so the idea that because of the delay canada is now looking at the chinese market. that's not true. as a matter of fact, the been in the china market and the reason to look at the china market has nothing to do with the delay. it has to do with the fact china is the fastest-growing market right now in the world and has enormous potential and if you are and oil exporter in that business that is a market you have to look at, isn't it, just reasona

it was and that atmospheric that transcanada realized that there is a huge downside.it would create a very impossible situation. the best approach would be to see if they could reach an agreement with nebraska. that happens. that happened right after the special session started. for me it is that a credibility issue. i think they prefer the original route. they realize that practically speaking they needed to come to some kind of agreement with the state. that has been done. this legislation respect that process. the president can start this by the granting of the permit. he does not have to wait for us. one last thing i would like to say. if you check the comments that have been made by secretary clinton, at the state department has jurisdiction, she said we will be done by the end of the year. then there was the circling of the white house by the environmental groups. the president's got in the middle of it. all of a sudden now we are being delayed more than a year. the president can build this pipeline today. >> there is one other issue, too. transcanada has gone t

transcanada, basically said there are a couple thousand jobs in building it. that makes sense. there are jobs there. they said that there's 50 or 60 permanent jobs. i'm not going to get in their face and tell them there aren't jobs. don't try to tell me it's 20,000 or 30,000 jobs or whatever fantasy number. here in this town any time you talk about anything you have to talk about jobs. that's right. an awful lot of americans without jobs, but they are wildly exaggerating the jobs that are going to come out of and stay as part of this 350eu7line. host: kelly republican line for jim himes. caller: hi, i want to make a comment that the wealthiest people are the people who make good decision was their money and work hard and create jobs. if we keep taxing them. they weren't given the money. taking their money, they are not going to create jobs. guest: well, that's partly right. look, i voted to extend the tax cuts last december because i think in a situation of economic uncertainty you don't raise taxes on frankly anybody. now, hopefully we are not always in a world of economic unc

the ceo of transcanada says it will two years to build the pipeline and employ about 6500 people, butepartment puts that employment figure a bit lower saying it would create between 5 and 6,000 construction jobs, and then there are other estimates on how many jobs it would create. bill: brand-new fox polling numbers now in the state of the race for 2012, one poll asking voters we did who will win the white house. voters put president obama on top with a lead at 44%. former house peaker newt gingrich in second at 16%. trailing behind him is mitt romney at 15% when you stack the three up now. martha: the gop frontrunner taking his campaign to south carolina which is a logical stop because it's the first in the south primary. that is going to happen on the 21st of january. the former house speaker telling a group of business leaders in greenville that getting america back on track will take a true national effort. watch. >> i don't think any one person can get america back on the right track. what i will do is ask you to be with me, and by with me i mean i want you first of all to agree

now, officials from the company building the pipeline, transcanada, said this morning they'd offer thateline would offer the u.s. is supply of oil from a friendly neighbor instead of places such as the middle east and venezuela, but the jobs issue, jon, is paramount here. jon all kinds of good arguments, it would seem, to build that thing. jim angle, thank you. >> reporter: you bet. jenna: well, new information now on this story about a widow's fight to get her late husband's military benefits. the army has said that arkansas national guard captain samsome luke died at home and, therefore, the family was uneligible to get those benefits each though captain luke had been on duty. we're going to need more background on this. jennifer griffin at the pentagon has more. what happened to captain luke? >> reporter: essentially, he was on a two-day training assignment with the arkansas national guard. i've seen a copy of his orders. and according to captain luke's family, he came home to sleep that night after a grueling day of heavy labor in the freezing cold with his unit, and his heart stopp

it is being run by a canadian company called the trans canada -- called transcanada.re was an explainer on the pipeline. caller: both parties need to grow up. host: thanks, joanne. turning to the primary calendar that is coming up. in about five minutes, we'll go live to a campaign event with michele bachmann in spencer, iowa. the campaign calendar -- the iowa caucuses, january 3, followed by the new hampshire presidential primary on the 10th. on the 21st, the south carolina republican presidential primary. followed on the 31st degenerate by the florida presidential primary. -- followed on the 31st by the florida presidential primary. a few stories from the campaign -- this is from today's "wall street journal. -- "wall street journal." it says -- this is from the "wall street journal." mitt romney won another high- profile endorsement as nikki haley joined others -- it goes on to say that mr. gingrich, a former congressman from georgia, has been endorsed by a number of legislators -- the governor romney is one person that president obama continues to go oveafter over

every coin and issue, according to the "new york times" in an editorial said the pipeline company transcanadaould create 6500 construction jobs annually. they also estimate 6500 temporary jobs. and in an independent study, they conclude it may generate no more than 50 permanent jobs when the work is done. so if the pipeline company itself says only 6500 jobs may be created, why are we hearing this number 20,000 being bantered about? >> the industry and union have both agreed that it's 20,000 jobs. it doesn't cost the government anything and it will provide cheaper energy for every american household. why not go forward with something that's going to give us cheaper energy, more energy, trading with our partner canada instead of having to import from middle eastern countries or south american countries that are not our friends, why wouldn't we create a job in any way that we can in a way that's good for all americans. >> i'm following those in high profile that are coming out with endorsements. you have yet to do that for any of the republican candidates. do you know who you are going to suppo

guest: transcanada has basically said there are a couple thousand jobs in building it.kes sense. there are jobs in building a pipeline. there are 50 or 60 permanent jobs. i'm not quite get in their face and tell them that they're not jobs. do not tell me 20,000 jobs or fantasy numbers. anytime you talk about anything in this town, you got to talk about jobs. that is right. an awful lot of americans without jobs. they are wildly exaggerating the jobs that are going to stay with this pipeline. host: baltimore maryland, republican line. caller: the wealthiest people make good decisions with their money and create jobs. they were not given the money that they have. the earned it. by taking their money, we are not going to create any more jobs. guest: well, that is partly right. i voted to extend the tax cuts last december. in a situation of economic uncertainty, you did not raise taxes on frankly anybody. hopefully we're not always in a world of economic uncertainty. let's remember the other side of this. the idea that the wealthiest people create the jobs -- they all went

this red line shows an existing pipeline, the keystone pipeline which was built very recently by transcanada of crude to the united states. the keystone x.l. pipeline would provide more than 700,000 barrels a day of crude oil to our refineries. in addition to canadian crude it will also haul domestic crude from states like north dakota and montana, will put 100,000 barrels a day of our own light, sweet, domestic crude into the pipeline to bring it down to refineries for our needs in the country. the pipeline will also help move oil from places like cushing where we currently have backlogs to the refineries as well. it's about moving oil within our country as well as bringing canadian crude to the united states and to our refineries. i mentioned it's a job creation bill. as our leader said just a minute ago, just the construction alone will put 20,000 workers on the job. 20,000 workers on the job, just constructing the pipeline and the perryman group out of waco, texas has indicated 250,000 jobs. it's a huge job creator. i yield to our leader, senator mcconnell. mr. mcconnell: it's my underst

when transcanada originally filed an application for a presidential permit with the department of state. the presidential permit review process was conducted by the state department, the environmental protection agency, and many other agencies within the federal government. after three years of comprehensive review and several changes to the project to accommodate environmental concerns, the final report to the white house incorporated 57 project specific special conditions for the design, construction, and operation of the keystone x.l. pipeline. in simple terms, the keystone x.l. pipeline was designed to be the safest pipeline the world has ever known. here's the truth why the keystone x.l. pipeline promises to be the safest pipeline ever. as proposed the keystone x.l. pipeline will be monitored 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year with the most advanced technologies. it will be buried at a deeper depth than similar pipelines to minimize risk. it will utilize multiple leak detection methods and fail-safe shutoff systems as well as having an emergency response program in

sherman i obviously cannot speak for transcanada.s well. they only move the product. >> would the american petroleum institute supported statute that provided the pipeline could be built, perhaps with additional environmental safeguards, but prohibited the export of the oil carried by that pipeline? >> no sir, don't think api with support that. >> okay so basically you are not here to try to give us energy security. you are here to try to let some oil companies makes a money by building a pipeline. >> no sir, don't think that's right. >> you don't create energy security by having canadian oil to europe as opposed to exported to japan. >> i disagree with you. >> through the united states. well, the fact is, if the proponents of the pipeline and the industry itself insists on the right to export, if the plan is to build a pipeline bypassing our interior markets in the middle west and bringing it to a port well-equipped for export, it sure looks like export. but if you look at the refiners in the gulf coast that have invested billions o

enbridge, which is a competitor to transcanada, is looking at increasing its capacity and extending its pipeline. marathon refineries looking to expand the pipeline to handle canadian crudes. mr. huizenga: zero taxpayer dollars will be used for this. it pill put thousands of american workers back to work at a critical time. the oil will be extracted, the question is where will it go? will it be shipped to the united states or go to asia to help fund the engine to compete against us? it's time to stand with the american worker, mr. speaker. -- mr. president. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the minority leader rise? ms. pelosi: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. pelosi: the president is at fort bragg thanking our men and women in uniform for their service, and for the sacrifices they have been willing to make to keep us the home of the brave and land of the free. america's brave men and women in uniform have done everything that has been asked of them -- asked of t

this pipeline, the keystone pipeline built by transcanada, as you can see, tracks from alberta, canada, all the way down to patuka, illinois. so it's similar in that it brings canadian crude into our refineries here in the united states which is refined and reduces our dependence on other foreign sources of oil. about 590,000 barrels a day flows through the keystone pipeline right now. so when we talk about the keystone x.l. project, we're not talking about something that hasn't been done before. in fact, we just got done permitting this pipeline, which is almost identical, bringing oil from the same place roughly in canada down to refineries in the united states. that's already been approved by e.p.a. and the department of state. went through the requisite study processes. went through the proper processes with the department of state. it has been approved. 590,000 barrels a day coming into our country to reduce our dependence on oil from places like the middle east and venezuela right now. so when we talk about keystone x.l., we're really not talking about doing anything we haven't a

have come together behind an alternative route which i believe was agreeable to the country, to transcanada, and so you can no longer hide behind that and use that as a shield. and the legislation that we introduced would make, of course, this subject to states' rights and having states like nebraska intervene and work with the company to find this alternative route. it also would ensure and require strong environmental protections in the legislation, and so that issue is something that the legislation is addressed. but more than anything else, mr. president, is what it does, is that it at least forces some action. it at least says we are going to be serious about job creation in this country or we're not. we are going to support a shovel-ready project that could create 20,000 jobs and start immediately or we're not. and so all this rhetoric and all the hot air that comes from people here in washington, d.c., about wanting to create jobs, this is really putting it to the test. this is where you have to put up or shut up when it comes to whether or not you are serious about creating jobs in

neither transcanada nor the republicans even though they say we would do it for our national security. here we are at the end of the year, light bulb efficiency out the door. they would like to do the same thing for increased efficiency in the vehicles which we drive, the planes which we ply fly in, the boats which we sail here in the united states, as we watch the middle east in turmoil, as we see iran and iraq perhaps growing closer together. they are trying to reduce the efficiency of our country by making it more likely we consume oil. more likely that we -- could i have 30 additional seconds? is that possible? ms. slaughter: i'm pleased to yield another minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. markey: here we have again a misunderstanding on the part of the republicans on our key national security issue. and that is changing our relationship with the energy sources which we consume because it comes disproportionally out of the straits of hormuz, out of the middle east into our country. so this issue goes right to the core. this light bulb e