The Latest Pipeline Fight Is Coming To D.C.

Activists try to pressure Heitkamp to stand with Native Americans, and against the oil industry.

A line of protesters against the construction of the Dakota Access oil pipeline on the Standing Rock Reservation in North Dakota head to a unity rally on the west steps of the State Capitol late Thursday in Denver.
AP Photo/David Zalubowski
Jason Plautz
Add to Briefcase
Jason Plautz
Sept. 12, 2016, 8 p.m.

The fight over the Dakota Ac­cess pipeline is com­ing to Wash­ing­ton this week—and act­iv­ists are de­term­ined to put pres­sure on Sen. Heidi Heitkamp to take a stand.

The con­tro­ver­sial pipeline, which would stretch 1,200 miles from North Dakota to Illinois, has been the cen­ter of a grow­ing de­bate about the rights of Nat­ive Amer­ic­ans and the im­pact of fossil fuels on the en­vir­on­ment. The Stand­ing Rock Sioux Tribe has chal­lenged the pro­ject, say­ing it would dam­age sites of his­tor­ic and cul­tur­al sig­ni­fic­ance to the tribe and would threaten Lake Oahe, a ma­jor drink­ing-wa­ter source.

The tribe on Fri­day lost a court chal­lenge to halt con­struc­tion, but the White House shortly af­ter­ward said it was paus­ing the per­mit for con­struc­tion un­der Lake Oahe un­til it could de­term­ine if fur­ther re­view was needed, and ask­ing Dakota Ac­cess to hold off on con­struc­tion with­in 20 miles of the lake.

Heitkamp has so far not taken a defin­it­ive stand on the pipeline, in­stead de­fer­ring to the court pro­cess and tribes’ rights to protest. In a state­ment Fri­day, the North Dakota Demo­crat said it was “dis­ap­point­ing that today’s back-to-back fed­er­al court rul­ing and ad­min­is­tra­tion de­cision brought more ques­tions than an­swers—with no light at the end of the tun­nel for North Dakotans.”

“For our state’s close-knit com­munit­ies, this pro­longed lack of cer­tainty is par­tic­u­larly pain­ful, and I’ll press the ad­min­is­tra­tion and vari­ous agen­cies for the fi­nal­ity they de­serve,” she said. “Go­ing for­ward, my main fo­cus will be on mak­ing sure that tribes are able to ex­er­cise their First Amend­ment right to protest peace­fully, and work­ers are able to do their jobs safely.”

En­vir­on­ment­al­ists, however, are try­ing to put pres­sure on the fossil-fuel-friendly Demo­crat to come out against the pro­ject. Act­iv­ists are ral­ly­ing Tues­day at the White House and else­where across the coun­try to try to bring a per­man­ent hold to the pro­ject and draw more at­ten­tion to the de­bate in Wash­ing­ton.

At the end of the week, the Cli­mate Hawks Vote su­per PAC will de­liv­er a Mo­ve­ pe­ti­tion to Heitkamp’s of­fice call­ing on her to op­pose the pipeline. As of Monday, the pe­ti­tion had more than 10,400 sig­na­tures.

“Sen­at­or Heitkamp has over the length of her ca­reer said she sup­ports nat­ive com­munit­ies and has made it a huge part of her plat­form to sup­port nat­ive wo­men and nat­ive com­munit­ies,” said Dal­las Goldtooth, who works on fossil-fuel is­sues for the In­di­gen­ous En­vir­on­ment­al Net­work. “That’s in dir­ect con­trast to sup­port for fossil fuel. We’d ask her to join these com­munit­ies in the fight against fossil-fuel ex­trac­tion, re­fin­ing, and de­vel­op­ment.”

Heitkamp was one of nine Demo­crats last year to vote in fa­vor of the Key­stone XL pipeline, which had emerged as a de­fault cli­mate test for politi­cians. Now en­vir­on­ment­al­ists are hop­ing to turn Dakota Ac­cess in­to the “next Key­stone,” char­ging that any large pipeline pro­ject pro­motes the burn­ing of more fossil fuels. The pro­ject would carry 470,000 bar­rels of crude oil a day from North Dakota’s oil-rich Bakken re­gion to re­finer­ies across the coun­try.

Us­ing the Key­stone mod­el, pipeline op­pon­ents are sure to keep the is­sue in the D.C. spot­light. Sen. Bernie Sanders pro­posed an amend­ment to the Sen­ate’s wa­ter-in­fra­struc­ture bill that would bar the Army Corps from ap­prov­ing the pro­ject un­til it com­pleted an en­vir­on­ment­al-im­pact state­ment (it is un­likely to see a floor vote). He will also speak at Tues­day’s White House rally.

Rep. Raul Gri­jalva traveled to North Dakota this week­end in sup­port of the Stand­ing Rock Sioux Tribe and, with Rep. Raul Ruiz, has called for a re­view of fed­er­al policies de­signed to pro­tect tri­bal lands.

Heitkamp also faces pres­sure be­cause of her ties to North Dakota’s Nat­ive Amer­ic­an pop­u­la­tion, which some have cred­ited with de­liv­er­ing her slim mar­gin of vic­tory in the 2012 elec­tion. Heitkamp serves on the Sen­ate’s In­di­an Af­fairs Com­mit­tee, and her first bill in the Sen­ate had to do with chal­lenges fa­cing Nat­ive Amer­ic­an chil­dren.

Stand­ing Rock Sioux chair­man Dave Archam­bault II last month spoke to Heitkamp and Re­pub­lic­an Sen. John Ho­even of North Dakota about the tribe’s op­pos­i­tion, say­ing, “The pipeline presents a threat to our land, our sac­red sites, our wa­ter, and to the people who will be af­fected,” ac­cord­ing to the Billings Gaz­ette.

On­go­ing re­view of the pro­ject is also sure to keep it in the pub­lic eye. The White House has not giv­en a timeline for when it would com­plete its re­view of the pro­ject, only that the Army Corps would “de­term­ine wheth­er it will need to re­con­sider any of its pre­vi­ous de­cisions.” The ad­min­is­tra­tion also said it would open a dis­cus­sion about pos­sible rule­mak­ing to re­form tribes’ in­put on in­fra­struc­ture pro­jects.

Pro­ponents, mean­while, are ur­ging that the pipeline move for­ward, wary of an­oth­er lengthy chal­lenge like the one that ul­ti­mately doomed Key­stone. Craig Stevens, a spokes­man for the Mid­w­est Al­li­ance for In­fra­struc­ture Now co­ali­tion, warned that the ad­min­is­tra­tion’s ac­tions were “deeply troub­ling and could have a long-last­ing chilling ef­fect on private in­fra­struc­ture de­vel­op­ment in the United States.

“No sane Amer­ic­an com­pany would dare ex­pend years of ef­fort and bil­lions of dol­lars weav­ing through an oner­ous reg­u­lat­ory pro­cess re­ceiv­ing all ne­ces­sary per­mits and agree­ments, only to be faced with ad­di­tion­al reg­u­lat­ory im­ped­i­ments and be shut down halfway through com­ple­tion of its pro­ject,” Stevens said in a state­ment.

What We're Following See More »
Byrd Rule Could Trip Up Health Legislation
4 hours ago

"Even if House Republicans manage to get enough members of their party on board with the latest version of their health care bill, they will face another battle in the Senate: whether the bill complies with the chamber’s arcane ... Byrd rule, which stipulates all provisions in a reconciliation bill must affect federal spending and revenues in a way that is not merely incidental." Democrats should have the advantage in that fight, "unless the Senate pulls another 'nuclear option.'”

Senate Votes To Fund Government
1 days ago
House Passes Spending Bill
1 days ago

The House has passed a one-week spending bill that will avert a government shutdown which was set to begin at midnight. Lawmakers now have an extra week to come to a longer agreement which is expected to fund the government through the end of the fiscal year in September. The legislation now goes to the Senate, where it is expected to pass before President Trump signs it.

Puerto Rico Another Sticking Point in Budget Talks
2 days ago

President Trump’s portrayal of an effort to funnel more Medicaid dollars to Puerto Rico as a "bailout" is complicating negotiations over a continuing resolution on the budget. "House Democrats are now requiring such assistance as a condition for supporting the continuing resolution," a position that the GOP leadership is amenable to. "But Mr. Trump’s apparent skepticism aligns him with conservative House Republicans inclined to view its request as a bailout, leaving the deal a narrow path to passage in Congress."

Democrats Threaten Spending Bill Over Obamacare
2 days ago

Democrats in the House are threatening to shut down the government if Republicans expedite a vote on a bill to repeal and replace Obamacare, said Democratic House Whip Steny Hoyer Thursday. Lawmakers have introduced a one-week spending bill to give themselves an extra week to reach a long-term funding deal, which seemed poised to pass easily. However, the White House is pressuring House Republicans to take a vote on their Obamacare replacement Friday to give Trump a legislative victory, though it is still not clear that they have the necessary votes to pass the health care bill. This could go down to the wire.


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.