South Dakota Native Americans describe House vote on Keystone XL pipeline as an ‘act of war’

[JerryL]

Giving privately owned land to a foreign sovereignty should be considered nothing less than treason. We should all be up in arms and revolting over the fact that our government is taking land that is owned by American citizens (both Native and native born alike) and giving them to another country. People want to complain that Obama policy = U.S.S.R., but the state taking to give to another state, to give to those who already have absurd power, is where the real comparisons between America and Lenin are to be found.

I'll send that note to Governor Troup of Georgia circa 1825.

 

[Midnight Rain]

You are grasping a straws to support your agenda against the American worker.

The oil industry gets about 47 Billio in subsidies. Why not cut that in half and put five billion towards green energy subsidies? Renewable energy sources (other than ethanol) only gets about five billion. Lets make green jobs. And then we also won't have to account for the trillions of dollars in damage caused by climate change.

 

[Riverwolf]

For those of you who are against the Keystone pipeline I have a couple of questions.
1. If the Keystone pipeline is not constructed will the oil that it would have been transporting not be used?

Hopefully.

2. If the Keystone pipeline is not built how will the oil from North Dakota and Montana reach refineries?

It won't because it shouldn't.

3. If the Canadian oil is shipped directly to China how would this affect the energy independence of the US?

It would probably help further alternative energy research and development, so it'd be a major benefit. Then we can make our own energy ourselves, without having to bring in stuff from other countries.

4. If those that supported Obama's stimulus package that implied it would help "shovel ready jobs"(which there was only a few) how can they not support the "shovel ready jobs" of the Keystone pipeline?

I don't know enough about the stimulus package to have an opinion on it, or to understand its relevance to the topic at hand.

But I can say this: if that pipeline has been marked as a likely target for terrorist attacks, and if the Lakota et al treat this as an act of war, then anyone working on that pipeline will be in grave danger, unnecessarily.

Feel free to attempt to spin the questions any which way you want.

Okay.

I thought you hated it when the Government does this sort of thing.

 

[Revoltingest]

Some background on taking property from one person to give to another:
Kelo v. City of New London - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005)[1] was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another private owner to further economic development. In a 5–4 decision, the Court held that the general benefits a community enjoyed from economic growth qualified private redevelopment plans as a permissible "public use" under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

I see it as an unconstitutional power grab by government, since it violates the explicit language of the 5th Amendment, which states....

....nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Note the underlined portion. "Public use" would not mean giving it to a private party.

Majority justices in the Kelo v New London decision:
Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer
Dissenting:
O'Connor, Scalia, Rehnquist, Thomas

How does this apply to Indian land? I don't know the legal basis. But it's clear that if the fed wants it, the fed will take it, And the Supreme Court will rationalize it.

 

[JerryL]

2. If the Keystone pipeline is not built how will the oil from North Dakota and Montana reach refineries?

The way it already does. By truck and boat. A lot of people will lose their jobs replaced by this pipeline. Sure: it will make some construction jobs until it's finished; but after that.

Well: the oil companies want it because it will save them money. How do you think it will do that? Less employees and less equipment (which is also built by people)

3. If the Canadian oil is shipped directly to China how would this affect the energy independence of the US?

It won't.

4. If those that supported Obama's stimulus package that implied it would help "shovel ready jobs"(which there was only a few) how can they not support the "shovel ready jobs" of the Keystone pipeline?

Looked at only from the jobs perspective: Because those temporary jobs will end permanent ones.

 

[dust1n]

Off-topic:
Hey Dustin, just wanted to say it is good to see you're still around

Oh. Just saw this, so sorry for the late thanks! Glad to see ya too.

 

[dust1n]

this apply to Indian land? I don't know the legal basis. But it's clear that if the fed wants it, the fed will take it, And the Supreme Court will rationalize it.

Oh dude, beats me. Trying to find out legalities surrounding Indian reservations and properties has to be one of the most difficult things to understand.

 

[dust1n]

No one else wants to discuss the disregard towards Indian treaties for the sake of building a pipeline through their territory?

 

[Drolefille]

I don't know enough about treaties and such to comment effectively. Breaking treaties with tribes is par for the course though :-/