---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: barry levine
Date: Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:26 AM
Subject: re:No Conflict of Interest Found in Favorable Review of Keystone Pipeline
To: "letters@nytimes.com"
From: barry levine
Date: Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:26 AM
Subject: re:No Conflict of Interest Found in Favorable Review of Keystone Pipeline
To: "letters@nytimes.com"
To the Editor:
The Obama/Holder department of Justice clings to a pattern of enforcing internal Executive-branch guidelines in place of the law. In the Durham investigation, it was asked not whether CIA agents, officers and contractors had broken the law, but whether they had violated internal DoJ guidelines. Now it emerges that the Keystone Pipeline was held to just such an extra-legal standard, asking not whether a conflict of interest existed--as forbidden by statute--but whether the report met internal guidelines.
But our president and his cabinet are charged not with the enforcement of guidelines that they make up inside the executive branch. It is their job as our constitution provides to "take care that the Laws be faithfully executed". And guidelines promulgated inside the executive branch, whether secret or published, never amount to "laws".
But our president and his cabinet are charged not with the enforcement of guidelines that they make up inside the executive branch. It is their job as our constitution provides to "take care that the Laws be faithfully executed". And guidelines promulgated inside the executive branch, whether secret or published, never amount to "laws".
Barry Haskell Levine
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/27/us/politics/no-conflict-of-interest-found-in-favorable-review-of-keystone-pipeline.html?_r=0
No Conflict of Interest Found in Favorable Review of Keystone Pipeline
By CORAL DAVENPORT
WASHINGTON — A State Department contractor who prepared an environmental analysis of the Keystone XL pipeline did not violate conflict-of-interest rules, even though the contractor had previously done work for TransCanada, the company seeking to build the pipeline, a State Department inspector general’s investigation concluded on Wednesday.
The results of the investigation could further pave the way for the Obama administration to approve the 1,700-mile, $5.4 billion pipeline, which would move oil from forest in Alberta, Canada, to the Gulf Coast. The pipeline has become a critical cause to environmentalists, who view President Obama’s ultimate decision as a reflection of his commitment to fight climate change. They have rallied, protested and been arrested by the thousands in an effort to pressure him to reject the project.
Supporters of the pipeline, particularly Republicans and the fossil fuel industry, hailed the new report, saying it further strengthened their case.
“Another day and another government report that finds no reason to continue blocking this common-sense, job-creating project,” Brendan Buck, a spokesman for House Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio, said in an email. “It’s long past time the president stop pandering to his extremist allies and just approve it so we can get people back to work.”
Opponents of the pipeline said the new report would do nothing to dampen their fight against it.
On Sunday, hundreds of protesters are expected to march on the White House, handcuff themselves to the gates and get arrested in a further effort to try to persuade Mr. Obama to reject the project.
“Secretary of State John Kerry inherited this mess, and now it’s time for him to bring it to a close by stating what is obvious — that this pipeline is not in our national interest,” said Elijah Zarlin, a campaign manager atCredo, a group organized against the pipeline. “If he doesn’t, more than 78,000 Americas stand ready to risk arrest to stop the White House and the State Department from putting the oil industry’s interest before our national interest, and recommending approval of Keystone XL.”
The inspector general’s report comes after a State Departmentenvironmental review last month concluded that construction of the pipeline would not substantially worsen carbon pollution because most future economic outlines project that the Alberta oil would be extracted and transported to market whether or not Keystone is built.
Environmentalists sharply criticized that report, as well as an earlier draft, which is what led to the inspector general’s investigation. The draft included analysis by a contractor, Environmental Resources Management, or ERM, which had previously done work for TransCanada. Last year, theSierra Club and several other environmental groups wrote a letter to the State Department’s inspector general calling for an investigation into a possible conflict of interest in the preparation of that draft.
The inspector general’s report concludes that the State Department’s process in selecting ERM followed, and was at times more rigorous, than was prescribed by agency guidance.
The report concludes that ERM fully disclosed its prior work history — including its work with TransCanada — and completed all previous work with TransCanada before undertaking the Keystone review.
The inspector general’s office notes that it began the review in response to the environmental groups’ letter, but determined, after a preliminary inquiry into the situation, that it did not warrant a criminal investigation.
The report does note that in two instances the State Department made “deviations” from its prescribed guidance on conflict of interest, but concludes that those deviations “did not adversely affect the selection process.” The report does recommend that the State Department improve its conflict of interest procedures.
For the time being, the fate of the pipeline rests in the hands of Mr. Kerry, who is studying the 11-volume environmental review and determining whether the project is “in the national interest.” Mr. Kerry, who has made climate change a signature issue of his tenure as secretary of state, will make a recommendation on the project to Mr. Obama.
On Monday, governors meeting with Mr. Obama in Washington said the president indicated that he would make a decision on the pipeline soon.
“He seems to be on board with the pipeline,” said Gov. Gary R. Herbert of Utah, a Republican who supports the pipeline. “I’m encouraged by what he said. He didn’t say yes or no, but I’m encouraged that he’ll make the right decision.”
The inspector general’s report is unlikely to silence calls from environmentalists or liberal Democrats for Mr. Obama to reject the pipeline.
On Tuesday, Representative Raúl M. Grijalva, Democrat of Arizona, sent a letter to the Government Accountability Office asking for a separate investigation of the State Department’s process for selecting contractors to perform the environmental impact study.
On Wednesday, Senator Barbara Boxer, the California Democrat who is chairwoman of the Environment Committee, held a news conference calling on the Obama administration to conduct an investigation into the impact of the pipeline on public health.
“The Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement was woefully inadequate regarding human health impacts, and we believe it is critically important that peer-reviewed research on these issues is fully considered before any decision is made on the Keystone XL pipeline,” Ms. Boxer wrote in a letter to Mr. Kerry.
No comments:
Post a Comment