Newt Gingrich has a plan: If the House is going to vote on military action in Syria, Speaker John Boehner should attach war-authorization votes to legislation forcing approval of the Keystone XL oil-sands pipeline.
Gingrich made his pitch to House leadership Thursday on Twitter:
House GOP should combine Keystone Pipeline and Syria into one up or down vote. Lets see who wants war while opposing American energy— Newt Gingrich (@newtgingrich) August 29, 2013
Politically, it has the markings of a shrewd move, as many House Democrats would be loath to vote against President Obama but equally unwilling to vote for a project that the party’s environmental base despises. Indeed, Democrats have largely voted against the project during the House’s seven separate attempts to force the White House’s hand on the pipeline.
But Gingrich’s bid to connect Keystone XL and Syria is plagued by a logical loophole: Unlike some of its Middle Eastern neighbors, Syria produces little oil, and almost none of it goes to the U.S.
By the numbers:
Syrian oil exports have been blocked by international sanctions since late 2011, and even before then, it was hardly a major player in world oil supply: It produced 0.4 percent of global supply pre-sanctions, and much of that was consumed internally.
The U.S. imported 476,000 barrels of oil from Syria in 2010, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
That same year, the U.S. used 7 billion barrels of oil, again according to the EIA.
That means Syria supplied a shade under 0.0067 percent of U.S. oil consumption, or about enough to meet America’s average 2010 oil demand for “¦ 36 minutes.
To be sure …
There are plenty of other arguments for or against a Syrian military strike, and — should one feel a need to make a case based strictly on energy — there’s an argument to be made that U.S. involvement in Syria could disrupt oil production throughout the region and put a major dent in U.S. supplies.
But if Gingrich is going to draw a direct line between Syria and Keystone XL, it’s going to take more than a tweet.
What We're Following See More »
In the The White House on Thursday night unveiled a series of executive actions to combat money laundering—"among the most comprehensive response yet to the Panama Papers revelations." The president's orders will tighten transparency rules, close loopholes that allow "foreigners to hide financial activity behind anonymous entities in the U.S., and demand stricter “customer due diligence” rules for banks.
The #NeverTrump movement is now mulling the idea of recruiting a candidate to run as an independent or under a third-party banner. But who might it be? The Hill offers a preliminary list.
- Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE)
- Mitt Romney
- 2012 (and perhaps 2016) Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson
- Former Marine Gen. John Kelly
- Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI)
- Former Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK)
- South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley
- Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)
The U.S. economy added 160,000 jobs in April, a "mildly disappointing" result relative to the 200,000 expected, according to the New York Times' Neil Irwin. On the plus side, hourly earnings were up 2.5% from a year ago. But on the other hand, "the labor force shrank by 362,000 people and the labor force participation rate fell by 0.2 percentage points."
"Nearly half of American voters who support either Democrat Hillary Clinton or Republican Donald Trump for the White House said they will mainly be trying to block the other side from winning, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released Thursday." When Trump supporters were asked to give their primary reason for supporting him, 47% said to block Clinton from winning. In almost a mirror image, 46% of Clinton supporters said they were primarily out to thwart Trump.