Just like this nation’s wealth imbalance, that people are finally protesting, this story is the result of ingrained and condoned corruption. Destroying the water supply is a commonplace practice throughout American government administrations. It's just a matter of politicians accepting bribes and being allowed to call their ill gotten gains "campaign contributions."
This time it is the environmental impact of the XL Pipeline. There is much difference between this and the same methods the government used to ignore pharmaceutical waste and livestock antibiotics in our water table. This poison water story is bigger than using the same methods to pretend that Atrazine in our drinking water is safe.
With the claim of "pushing atmospheric carbon concentrations so high that humans would be unable to avert a climate disaster" and the end result being "game over for the climate," this is no minor deadly water table story. Make no mistake about these facts, this is not a story about Hillery Clinton or bad advisers. The State Department answers to Barack Obama. This is one of many stories of this Democratic administration being actively engaged in masking the people from the facts.
While Occupy Wall Street is occupying everyone's time, this new development in the Keystone XL Pipeline controversy that came out last week, Pipeline Review Is Faced With Question of Conflict, needs more notice.
The State Department assigned an important environmental impact study of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline to a company with financial ties to the pipeline operator, flouting the intent of a federal law meant to ensure an impartial environmental analysis of major projects.
Notice those words "flouting the intent of a federal law meant to ensure an impartial environmental analysis." The law allows U.S. agencies to hire contractors to do environmental assessments, but says the companies should sign a disclosure statement outlining they have no financial interest in the outcome of the project.
This "Outsourcing of government responsibility" goes a little deeper than a mere conflict of interest. It sounds like voter's letters to the government will be filtered by that same corporation that has an interest in the completion of the XL Pipeline.
Cardno Entrix also played a substantial role in organizing the public hearings on the project for the State Department, the last of which was held Friday in Washington. The proposal is open for public comment until midnight Sunday, and the department’s Web site directs comment to a Cardno Entrix e-mail address
Last week more than 20 House members send a letter to Hillery Clinton, criticizing how her department has handled the review of TransCanada Corp's $7 billion pipeline proposal. This week three Senators sent another letter to Clinton about these questionable methods of the State Department but what will ever come of that?
I guess that's progress in America. Instead of the President expressing outrage about corruption withing his own administration, we get three isolated elected officials who picked up on the story. We get, Senators Raise ‘Serious Concerns’ About State Department Study on Tar Sands Oil Pipeline
WASHINGTON - October 14 - Three key senators today questioned the U.S. State Department about its dealings with a Canadian company seeking U.S. approval to build a crude oil pipeline from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico.
The State Department is responsible for deciding whether to approve the billion-dollar Keystone XL pipeline project. TransCanada, the company trying to build the pipeline, reportedly was permitted to screen private firms bidding to perform an environmental impact study.
Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) wrote a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton raising what they called "serious concerns" about the matter. Their letter questioned why Cardno Entrix was picked to perform the critical study despite its significant financial ties to TransCanada.
"We find it inappropriate that a contractor with financial ties to TransCanada, which publicly promotes itself by identifying TransCanada as a ‘major client', was selected to conduct what is intended to be an objective government review," the senators said.
"This is a critically important issue for our environment and the energy future of our country. At a time when all credible scientific evidence and opinion indicate that we are losing the battle against global warming, it is imperative that we have objective environmental assessments of major carbon-dependent energy projects," the letter added.
The senators said "the only satisfactory remedy" would be for the State Department to conduct a new, objective, and comprehensive environmental review, either directly or through a contractor with no financial ties to TransCanada.
Few others will pay attention to the fact that this environmental report is compromised and who wants to know about the cozy relationships with the State Department?
Environmental groups have also scrutinized the relationship between State Department officials and TransCanada's representative in Washington. Paul Elliott, who worked on Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, was actively lobbying the State Department and Congress about the project for a year and a half before he officially registered as a lobbyist, according to State Department email messages made public by the environmental group Friends of the Earth. Elliott did not comment on the emails, but a TransCanada spokesperson said he was simply doing his job as a lobbyist.
The emails showed a friendly relationship between Elliott and his State Department contact, who wrote "Go Paul!" when Elliott secured the support of a key congressman for the Keystone project.
How did this Republican style corruption continue under a Democratic President? Well Bill MiKibben, who has worked so hard to get the facts about the XL Pipeline out to the public, offered an explanation in Obama's Failing E-mails: Where Did the President's Mojo Go?
As the months of his administration rolled into years, he only seemed to grow less interested in movements of any sort. Before long, people like Tom Donahue, president and CEO of the US Chamber of Commerce, were topping the list of the most frequent visitors to the White House. And that was before this winter when—after they’d been the biggest contributors to GOP Congressional candidates—Obama went on bended knee to the chamber’s headquarters, apologizing that he hadn’t brought a fruitcake along as a gift. (What is it with this guy and food? At any rate, he soon gave them a far better present, hiring former chamber insider Bill Daley as his chief of staff.)
Now, his popularity tanking, Obama and his advisors talk about “tacking left” for the election. A nice thought, but maybe just a little late.
Increasingly, it seems to me, those of us who were ready to move with him four years ago are deciding to leave normal channels and find new forms of action. Here’s an example: by year’s end the president has said he will make a decision on the Keystone XL pipeline, which would carry crude oil from the tar sands of northern Alberta to the Gulf of Mexico. The nation’s top climate scientists sent the administration a letter indicating that such a development would be disastrous for the climate. NASA’s James Hansen, the government’s top climate researcher, said heavily tapping tar-sands oil, a particularly “dirty” form of fossil fuel, would mean “game over for the climate.” Ten of the president’s fellow recent Nobel Peace Prize laureates pointed out in a letter that blocking the prospective pipeline would offer him a real leadership moment, a “tremendous opportunity to begin transition away from our dependence on oil, coal, and gas.”
But every indication from this administration suggests that it is prepared to grant the necessary permission for a project that has the enthusiastic backing of the Chamber of Commerce, and in which the Koch Brothers have a “direct and substantial interest.”
Bill MiKibben went on to describe the same facts found here and then hit home.
This is simply corrupt, potentially the biggest scandal of the Obama years. And here’s the thing: it’s a crime still in progress. Watching the president do nothing to stop it is endlessly depressing.
If this was the exception instead of the rule, it might not seem so hopeless. Just like Atrizine, there is the chemicals from Hydrolic fracturing and government bodies, going from a Republican administration to a Democrat has changed from poisoned well deniers to dragging their heels so as to do nothing. But this is not just inaction, this is working very hard to hide the truth.
People are asking questions but where are the answers? At this point, reading this new controversy, I'm having trouble with the fact that I even voted for Barack Obama in 2008. It's not like I had a choice and even more depressing there will be no choice in 2012. No prominent Democrat will stand up to the man who is willing to kill the planet for some cash from monied interest. Either way, you lose.