Are you ready for the next payroll fight?

rob333January 18, 2012

Congress is bracing themsleves to ready for the fight, and hope to get a payroll tax law in place by February 29th, with cuts also planned.

I asked for a raise, for the first time ever in my life, yesterday. I hope it'll come and I'll survive.

The Article below explains what's going on in Congress and what to expect.

Here is a link that might be useful: Huffington Post-Payroll Tax Cut Extension: Congress Revisiting Bruising Fight

Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
PRO
Brushworks Spectacular Finishes(5)

What are you doing with your Social Security tax cut?

Are you saving it or spending it?

    Bookmark   January 18, 2012 at 4:05PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

Well hold on folk before you get to excited......

The Republicans insisted on tying the payroll tax holiday to the Canadian oil pipeline....although I must admit the connection between the two escapes me.

The WH has just announced that the arbitrary timelines imposed in the bill are not enough time to do the proper environmental assessments are therefore are not approving the pipeline as being in the best national interest of the States.

So it will be interesting to see what new wrinkle the Republicans will put into this bill to get what they want. Certainly it is not in their nature just to deal with the payroll tax issue straight up.

Meanwhile, we Canadians will puff ourselves up and sell our "stuff" to China thus cutting out the American middleman.

    Bookmark   January 18, 2012 at 4:20PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

Well if they would just take care of it before the very last minute that would help.

I'm spending my Social Security tax cut like there's no tomorrow!

    Bookmark   January 18, 2012 at 5:18PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

Yeah three years...about face!!

David L. Goldwyn, who until earlier this year had served as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's Special Envoy and Coordinator for International Energy Affairs, said in an interview aired over the weekend that Clinton would likely approve plans for a contentious pipeline to deliver oil from Canada's tar sands to the Texas Gulf Coast.

But not to worry, Obama says the payroll tax cut is creating more jobs than the pipeline would.

"I think that balancing jobs, energy security -- a country which has increased production potentially the size of Libya -- I think the case for a pipeline is overwhelming, and she will approve it," Goldwyn said, speaking to Platts Energy Week, an energy-themed television program.

On Friday, the State Department issued its final Environmental Impact Statement, concluding that the proposed 1,700-mile pipeline would have "no significant impact" on the environment and recommending that the project move forward, despite warnings from environmental groups that, among other things, the project would help accelerate the warming of the planet.

Here is a link that might be useful: link

    Bookmark   January 18, 2012 at 6:25PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

Gee, mrskjun, that link is dated 8/29/11. Why post something old?

    Bookmark   January 18, 2012 at 6:29PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
rob333

Spending it on groceries, medication, car repairs, etc. I don't think I get to "save" it. I wish!

    Bookmark   January 18, 2012 at 6:37PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

esh, exactly when the State Dept. issued their "final" environmental impact statement! Did you notice that?

    Bookmark   January 18, 2012 at 7:01PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
PRO
Brushworks Spectacular Finishes(5)

Chase,

We don't want your oil pipeline. :)

Besides, there will be negotiations soon to discuss an alternate route/plan.

A statement released by the department said it doesn't preclude TransCanada from applying again with a different route, and the company said in a press release that it will do just that.

We'll get that dirty oil to the gulf, even if it kills us.

    Bookmark   January 18, 2012 at 7:11PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

when the State Dept. issued their "final" environmental impact statement

You must have missed all the news since then; there's a revised environmental review in process. The administration had initially hoped to make a decision on the Alberta-to-Texas pipeline by the end of the year, but State said the revised environmental review will take until early 2013 at the earliest, with a final decision to follow.â¨

The Department cited "environmental sensitivities" in the proposed route and said it would look at alternative routes in Nebraska, where critics say the planned path would threaten a vital aquifer by traversing the Sand Hills region.â¨â¨

    Bookmark   January 18, 2012 at 7:15PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
david52 Zone 6

The State Department issues Environmental Impact Statements? Since when?

    Bookmark   January 18, 2012 at 7:59PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
PRO
Brushworks Spectacular Finishes(5)

When pipelines go bad. This incident is less than a week old and just a few miles west of me.

WELLINGTON, Ohio - Residents from 30 houses near the site of a gasoline leak in Wellington will not be able to return to their homes for several more days.

At about 10:45 p.m. on Thursday, leak in an 8-inch pipeline was reported and Sunoco Logistics sent crews to the scene. As of Monday night, the company said 116,760 gallons of gas had been released.

"We are working to resolve this situation as safely and quickly as possible," area manager for Sunoco Logistics Charlie Stewart said. The company added that the leak is contained and that several containment booms are set up.

Air continues to be monitored at the site, and recovered soil and gas is being set to an EPA-approved facility for treatment.

Area residents were evacuated as a precaution and it will be up to local authorities to decide when they can go back to their homes. No injuries have been reported. Any residents with questions should call Sunoco Logistics at 855-430-4491.

According to reports from U.S. Department of Transportation�s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Sunoco pipeline�s had 143 incidents since 2006, resulting in more than $12 million in property damage.

    Bookmark   January 18, 2012 at 8:00PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
david52 Zone 6

How much did that last year's 'rupture in a river' in Montana cost to clean up?

/who cares about fish, anyway.

This summer, an ExxonMobil pipeline carrying oil across Montana burst suddenly, soiling the swollen Yellowstone River with an estimated 42,000 gallons of crude just weeks after a company inspection and federal review had found nothing seriously wrong.

And in the Midwest, a 35-mile stretch of the Kalamazoo River near Marshall, Mich., once teeming with swimmers and boaters, remains closed nearly 14 months after an Enbridge Energy pipeline hemorrhaged 843,000 gallons of oil that will cost more than $500 million to clean up.

While investigators have yet to determine the cause of either accident, the spills have drawn attention to oversight of the 167,000-mile system of hazardous liquid pipelines crisscrossing the nation.

The little-known federal agency charged with monitoring the system and enforcing safety measures - the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration - is chronically short of inspectors and lacks the resources needed to hire more, leaving too much of the regulatory control in the hands of pipeline operators themselves, according to federal reports, an examination of agency data and interviews with safety experts.

They portray an agency that rarely levies fines and is not active enough in policing the aging labyrinth of pipelines, which has suffered thousands of significant hazardous liquid spills over the past two decades." snip

Here is a link that might be useful: another example of the industry successfully regulating itself

    Bookmark   January 18, 2012 at 8:35PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

Brush, Its not our Pipeline its your pipeline in the sense it goes through your country and only you should decide if that is a good thing or a bad thing.

On the other hand the oil is ours and rather than pipe it south I would like to see it refined here and sold on the open market.

Don't love the industry and what it does but better the jobs should be here.

    Bookmark   January 18, 2012 at 9:15PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

Well, It would be hard to say that nixxing the pipeline was done for some noble reason. The union vote is already a lock, they will never back a republican. So the environmental vote and the money that comes with them is really important this election. So the only "jobs" that matters in this decision is his own, for another four years.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 5:28AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jmc01

And would you also be equally hard pressed to say that T. Roosevelt had a noble reason when he stood up to businessmen who wanted to create jobs through lumbering and related industries and instead preserved US lands under what became the National Park System?

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 6:08AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

Actually jmc, I would. Obama is no T. Roosevelt and there is nothing noble about his reasons.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 6:45AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jmc01

What inside information are you privileged to, mrsk? Or. Might it be that you seem to project a bias with anything relating to oil?

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 7:02AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
PRO
Brushworks Spectacular Finishes(5)

Some union bosses will make threats, but it's just huffing and puffing (empty threats or objections, bluster).

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 7:07AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

The pipeline is bad for the environment. Just because we made bad environmental decisions in the past doesn't mean we have to repeat them.

My personal opinion? Obama listened to the protests and reconsidered his support. Nothing wrong with making a better decision the second time around.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 7:15AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
maddie_athome

Time to invade Montana too.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 7:22AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

Hey, I'm happy enough. Go and read some of the online blogs and online polls. Two to one, people are so angry over this. His decision ensures a Republican in the White House come November. I wouldn't be surprised to see his approval ratings drop into the 30's by next week.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 7:40AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
maddie_athome

Among the teabaggers. Who cares.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 7:48AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

Yeah, I'm not worried.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 7:51AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
PRO
Brushworks Spectacular Finishes(5)

That dirty oil will make it to the gulf. You can count on it.

The opportunity to make money exists and money will buy the pipeline a residence somewhere in the USA.

âÂÂThis outcome is one of the scenarios we anticipated,â Girling said in a statement. âÂÂWhile we are disappointed, TransCanada remains fully committed to the construction of Keystone XL. Plans are already underway on a number of fronts to largely maintain the construction schedule of the project.âÂÂ

Here is a link that might be useful: It will come, to a neighborhood near you.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 8:05AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

OK I must be muddled on this but I was certain that the announcement simply was that the proper agencies could not conduct the studies required in the arbitrary timeline imposed by the Republicans in the payroll bill.

I believe the studies will continue as the President proposed a few months back which I realize was a delay to the original schedule.

The OP is about the payroll tax. I think this was a play to get the pipeline out of the payroll discussion.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 8:26AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

chase, the environmental impact study was done over a three year period. In August 2011, the state dept issued the report. Everything was a go at that time. If anyone see's this as anything other than politics? lol But, like I said, it's good politics, for the republicans for sure.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 8:32AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
maddie_athome

Fat chance, Chase.

The ones pushing for it were (and still are) paid and bribed to push it and now they can't deliver.

Apologies to Rob, for taking this thread way out, all the way to Montana (or is it Lala-Land?).

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 8:33AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
rob333

Thanks maddie, totally ok. The bill itself did/does include the language for pipeline stuff, and so it cannot be extricated from the payroll tax issue.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 8:38AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

Mrs, obviously I did not make myself clear in what I was trying to say.

!) I know that there were studies done before.

2) I know that the President said they would reevaluate the decision to approve the pipeline.

3) Then the Republicans put a time limit on that reevaluation and tied it to the payroll tax bill.

4) It is this time limit that the President is rejecting to get the pipeline debate out of the tax bill. This is not a new or further delay to the one he announced a month or so ago. In other words a restatement of 2)

That's what I'm trying to clear up.....he refused the accelerated timeline placed in the payroll bill in order to get this red herring out of the payroll bill.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 8:45AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
david52 Zone 6

The pipeline company has already said they will reapply.

Hey, when was the last time in this country that the petroleum industry didn't get what they wanted? The pipeline will be built, fuel prices will go up in the mid-west as the supply can then move to other markets, we all keep our fingers crossed that something like an earth quake etc doesn't happen, and we don't see any repeats of all the under-regulated pipeline ruptures mentioned above.

In the mean time, blame the Blame Obama Circus is in full swing.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 8:49AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
PRO
Brushworks Spectacular Finishes(5)

Blame Nebraska.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 8:54AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
maggie2094

Chase, I don't know enough about the pipeline, does Canada have the refineries to process? Since this is really global oil, why do they want to send it south? (and thank you for all the info)

What is hidden in all this, is Obama has no political gain here. He did not make the political decision, he made the pragmatic thoughtful decision. Big oil did not get to run rough shod over corrupt governmetn agencies like they normally do. The amount of pipeline construction jobs is estimated now at 2,500. The amount of jobs this pipeline could kill is unknown if there was an accident. That is why you see the unlikely alliance of farmers, ranchers, and environmentalist.

If the republicans are going to hang their hat on higher taxes for Americans that get a paycheck, then they are going to pay come the fall. This type of cut is stimulus that goes right back into the economy and does give the small business a break and allow them to create jobs.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 9:02AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

Maybe I'm wrong, heaven knows I've been wrong many a time. Maybe it is a total cancellation. The PM of Alberta has announced that she is reapplying to the States.

PM Harper announced he is off to Bejing to negotiate a deal with the Chinese.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 9:03AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
maddie_athome

Blame invade Nebraska.

Fixed that for you.

_________________________________________________________________

Well. Well. Well. (sorry Rob!)

Approximately 75,000 jobs were created in the oil and gas sector under the Obama Administration between 2009 to 2011, according to analysis of data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

That's roughly 69,000 more jobs than would be created by construction of the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline.

Butbutbut! OBAMA!!!

Here is a link that might be useful: Source.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 9:14AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

maggie, of course he has political gain. Do you know where the bulk of his campaign money is coming from this time around? Environmental groups and celebrities that call themselves environmentalists. He believes the unions will continue to back him, think Boeing in South Carolina. And 2500 jobs? Unbelievable that anyone would put that number out there. The economic impact would be huge. But, like I said, I'm happy. We'll get the pipeline and a new president while we are at it.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 9:17AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
maggie2094

Mrs, I find it sad that you frame everything in a political lens and that the only thing you care about is if your team wins and the short term. Obama did not do what big oil or what construction unions wanted in this instance. From a sound bite point of view, he would have been better off approving. I am glad he is looking out for future generations here and not the quick political point. There are no easy polical line to draw here, hence why you haven't started a thread on it? lol When it comes to pipa he comes out on the side of technology and not hollywood. So many more examples but I know you don't want to see it.

Maddie, good info and jm, T. Roosevelt came to mind for me as well.

Chase, does Canada have the ability to refine this oil and create jobs in Canada?

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 9:26AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

maggie, it isn't about my team winning. It's about getting Obama out of the White House.

And if you think I'm alone in this, read the editorial pages of newspapers. Other than the New York Times, so far I haven't found one that agrees with what Obama has done.

An example..

Here is a link that might be useful: link

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 9:32AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

No Maggie we don't have the facilities to refine all we have. We have enough for our own needs but not for all we have available for export.

Not sure it is worth it to the oil companies to build refineries and export refined products vs exporting the raw crud...and that is not a typo! ;)

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 9:37AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

maggie, it isn't about my team winning. It's about getting Obama out of the White House.

Sounds like the same thing to me. I agree that he is getting a lot of flack for this decision. But it gives everyone a little more time to look into it.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 9:41AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
maggie2094

Thanks, Chase. I didn't know the answer to that. Keep Canada pristine. So they weigh building refineries there to building a pipeline across the US. Very interesting issue.

Right on, Esh.

Mrsk, I don't understand why you ignore what the states want here and why you are against the further vetting of this project by everyone involved...and why the heck is environmentalist a bad word?? I suppose if Obama gave the premature green light, we could say he caved to big oil and the union thugs.

Shameless that this ultimatum was attached to the short payroll tax cut.

My respect continues to grow for this president.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 9:48AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

esh, that is such a fallacious argument. Over three years on the environmental impact study. The State Dept. gave the go ahead in August of 2011. This is similar to his own handpicked economic team. They tell him what needs to be done, so he rejects their recommendations. It's good to be King!

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 9:52AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
maggie2094

So your saying Nebraska did not have the right to petition for a longer review of alternate routes?

Invade, Nebraska is right.

The president showed true leadership here and stood up strong.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 10:02AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

Maggie, remember these decisions are made by the oil companies. I suspect they have capacity in American refineries and would rather use that than build new ones here.

The above is pure speculation on my part but what I do know is the oil companies make decisions good for the oil companies bottom line not your environment or ours.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 10:04AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
maggie2094

That is speculation I can believe in!

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 10:06AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

I see nothing wrong with taking extra time on environmentally sensitive decisions - even if it means going backwards to reopen a review.

It's the only environment we have, mrskjun. Once you destroy it, it's done. I will not be convinced otherwise that, for whatever reasons, this is the prudent thing to do.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 10:07AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
marshallz10(z9-10 CA)

I have to laugh that environmental vetting by the Department of State is so valuable. Sorry, but that doesn't compute. Why do we have an agency called the EPA which is assigned the role of assessing environmental impacts? Probably for political reasons unrelated to the environment.

The sin of political pandering is joining this matter with a bill involving payroll taxes.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 10:09AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

From Bloomberg

"Environmental groups have urged Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to reject the pipeline project, which requires approval from the State Department because it crosses an international border. TransCanada, based in Calgary, said it expects a decision from the department this year. In October, Clinton said she was "inclined" to approve Keystone XL."

You do understand marshall that the State Dept. is not the one that did the environmental impact study? That would have been the EPA. But because of crossing borders, the final approval had to come from the State Dept.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 10:21AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
PRO
Brushworks Spectacular Finishes(5)

That dirty oil will invade the USA, regardless of a payroll tax cut.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 10:21AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
marshallz10(z9-10 CA)

Yes, I understand the role of the State Department. I protest the assertion that the Department ran an EIR on the project. That is no where near its function. Of course, the Department could have put out a no-bid contract for millions of dollars to the private sector for an EIR.

I admit I am being too lazy to google the details.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 11:09AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
david52 Zone 6

Linked is what the Nebraska Farmers Union has to say about it. And anyone can google "Nebraska Farmers Keystone Pipeline" for a whole host of information on their opinion.

Using eminent domain to condemn their land to run through a for-profit, private, foreign-owned company, bearing all the risks of contamination, as well as being on the hook for grossly expanding their coop electric generation capacity to power this foreign owned entity.

They're not too happy about it.

Here is a link that might be useful: link

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 1:49PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
rob333

put it that way David, and I can totally see why. Sorry Canada! We need to create jobs elsewhere and/or in another way.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 3:03PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
david52 Zone 6

Another point that seems to be missed is the GOP insistence on making this a political football and forcing the Presidents hand this week is this:

1 - due to overwhelming pressure from the farmers in Nebraska/ others to avoid the Oglala aquifer, the pipeline company agreed to reroute the pipeline.

2) - they haven't had time to reroute it, and get the necessary preliminary approvals

3) GOP forces Obama's hand, insisting he approve the new route, something that hasn't even been specified where it will go, let alone any environmental, private property, geological, what ever all studies need to be made for the new route.

But hey, its all a political foot ball - but who looks like a fool.

    Bookmark   January 19, 2012 at 5:00PM
Sign Up to comment
More Discussions
George Zimmerman is a loose cannon!
Years ago, I wondered whether this might have been...
ronalawn82
When median incomes are down 15% there is no 'economic recovery'
Wisconsin is #1 in the US for shrinking middle class...
Lena M
The Shocking Finding From the DOJ's Ferguson Report Not Noticed
The Shocking Finding From the DOJ's Ferguson Report...
chijim
Supremes Uphold Voter ID Law
The Supreme Court let stand a 7th Circuit Court ruling...
Christopher_H
Sponsored Products
Gourmet Southern Pecan Pie
$55.00 | Horchow
Peacock Tufted Pile Rug by Thomas Paul
$390.00 | Lumens
36" Tullford Vanity for Semi-Recessed Sink - Cherry
Signature Hardware
Belize Outdoor Chaise Lounge Chair
Grandin Road
Nabia Outdoor Floor Fountain
Overstock.com
Turbopump 110
$87.95 | FRONTGATE
Kichler Sayre Collection Bronze 24" Wide Ceiling Fixture
Lamps Plus
Slamp | Ceremony Chandelier
YLighting
People viewed this after searching for:
© 2015 Houzz Inc. Houzz® The new way to design your home™