3 long-term consequences from Biden's cancellation of the Keystone pipeline
Keystone was a privately funded project constructing 1,200 miles of pipeline that would have brought 850,000 barrels of crude oil per day from Alberta, Canada, to the U.S. Gulf Coast for refining.
Because it would cross international borders, the U.S. State Department has permitting jurisdiction. In 2015, the Obama State Department approved the project, but President Obama, urged by Secretary of State John Kerry, denied the permits in the name of climate change.
Trump's reversal resumed construction, but the project was still ongoing when Joe Biden was inaugurated, and on his first day he revoked the permission, putting more than a thousand people out of work.
With Keystone back in the news, here are three long-term consequences Biden's cancellation caused:
Biden's cancellation set an ugly and dangerous precedent. The parent company of Keystone XL did not apply for a permit from the Obama State Department, nor did they make a deal with Donald Trump. They reached an agreement with the U.S. government, whose full faith and credit was undermined by Biden.
Obama fueled the drama around Keystone XL by calling it "dirty" and invoking fear of climate change. This labeling could apply to any large-scale construction project: an airport, a nuclear plant, a refinery. Activist groups will always present their "science," and outrage over "climate justice" can persuade a fickle future president to undo anything.
That is the precedent Biden set. America's word hinges on elections.
Part of President Trump's appeal is that he is not a career politician. He was a businessman and even more pertinent, he was a builder. The private sector understands financial risks in ways government never can.
Look at the $2 billion grant Biden's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) made to liberal activist Stacey Abrams for a new climate nonprofit with zero staff and zero accomplishments. The organizations had only $100 in revenue, and yet it received a taxpayer investment 20 million times earnings. Such a windfall would never happen in the private sector.
Government operatives, whether agency bureaucrats or longtime elected officials, don't understand the complexities of a project like Keystone. A lifelong politician himself, Biden's cancellation didn't come with a "bailout" by taxpayers.
Would any company take another risk on a costly project with green crusaders like California Gov. Gavin Newsom and U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., looming as wannabe White House hopefuls?
The personal sacrifice energy workers make for their jobs is often overlooked. On a 1,200-mile pipeline there are no Zoom meetings, working from home or even a commute home. You live at a camp, or many of the older workers have trailers or campers, and you travel with the project.
Like all construction jobs with an end date, skilled workers are lining up their next projects in advance. There were workers on Keystone who had five years of projected employment, but after Biden's actions, lost everything at the hands of a guy who called himself "Scranton Joe."
Unlike today's maelstrom of coverage over the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) bringing accountability to government bureaucrats, there was no sympathy or support from the mainstream media. No fawning "60 Minutes" segment or weepy CBS story of a park ranger who lost his "dream job."
The Keystone XL workers were necessary casualties in Biden's effort to save the planet.
Even with Trump in charge, government needs to win back the trust of industry. The federal government could sign an agreement that a cancellation of a project would lead to a refund of costs. Congress could reclaim permitting jurisdiction from the executive branch through well-written legislation.
As a builder, Donald Trump understands the importance of infrastructure projects. The Alaska LNG pipeline will need more than a decade. Proposed LNG pipelines from Pennsylvania to New England will require at least five years.
Businesses are thinking twice before putting billions of dollars on the line. Workers are taking a second look before taking a flyer on a project that a politician could cancel. These are not only the lessons of Keystone, but also the sad legacy of Joe Biden and the lasting damage he did to our country.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
25 minutes ago
- Newsweek
IMF Upgrades Global Growth After Trump Backtracks
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has upgraded its global growth forecasts for 2025, citing a weakened dollar, financial resilience in the face of economic headwinds, as well as the White House rolling back many of the tariffs threatened earlier in the year. On Tuesday, the global financial institution released its updated World Economic Outlook, which predicts global growth of 3 percent in 2025 and 3.1 percent in 2026. This is up from 2.8 and 3 percent, respectively, in its April report. Why It Matters Since assuming office in January, President Donald Trump's intermittent threats of high tariffs, and the sweeping announcement of reciprocal duties in early April, have rattled global markets and raised concerns over the prospect of a major economic downturn both in the U.S. and worldwide. What To Know The IMF gave several reasons for upgrading the global economic outlook. These included a "considerably" weakened dollar, which it said "provided some monetary policy space for emerging market and developing economies. IMF chief economist Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas also cited actions by certain governments to increase growth, as well as a "strong surge" in exports to the U.S. as businesses attempted to front-load due to concerns about tariffs coming into effect. The IMF also noted the multiple pauses that have been placed on tariffs since the April report, including the two delays to Trump's reciprocal tariffs, due to end this week, and the May agreement between China and the U.S. which lowers rates until August 12. Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas, International Monetary Fund (IMF) economic counselor and director of research, speaks during the IMF/World Bank Group Spring Meetings at the organization's headquarters in Washington, D.C. on April 23, 2025. Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas, International Monetary Fund (IMF) economic counselor and director of research, speaks during the IMF/World Bank Group Spring Meetings at the organization's headquarters in Washington, D.C. on April 23, 2025. Oliver Contreras/AFP via Getty Images "Following an unprecedented escalation in tariffs imposed on the rest of the world in April, the United States partly reversed course, pausing the higher tariffs for most of its trading partners," Gourinchas said in remarks delivered Tuesday. These have brought the effective U.S. tariff rate underlying the new projections to 17.3 percent, compared to 24.4 percent in April. Most countries in the IMF's projections have received a modest growth upgrade compared to the April report. This includes the U.S., which saw 0.1-percent bump for this year, and China, with an upward revision of 0.8 percent. "Despite these welcome developments, tariffs remain historically high, and global policy remains highly uncertain, with only a few countries having reached fully-fleshed out trade agreements," Gourinchas said, adding that the resilience of global markets to tariffs "is welcome, but it is also tenuous." The global growth forecasts of 3 percent for 2025 and 3.1 percent for 2026 still sit below the 3.3 percent projected for both years in January, before Trump returned to office. What People Are Saying Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas, economic counselor and director of the IMF Research Department, said: "While the trade shock could turn out to be less severe than initially feared, it is still sizable, and evidence is mounting that it is hurting the global economy." "Without comprehensive agreements, the ongoing trade uncertainty could increasingly weigh on investment and activity," he added. "Further, while exports front-loading has supported global activity so far, firms could become vulnerable if the demand for stockpiled goods does not materialize." Former Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross described tariff reversals by the administration as "really just part of the normal give and take in the trade negotiations." "The very fact that [Trump] put these up for negotiation means that there was some flexibility in the original proposal," Ross told Newsweek earlier this month. What Happens Next? The U.S. has so far secured a handful of trade deals, including with Indonesia, Japan and, most recently, the European Union. For the remaining countries that were handed reciprocal tariffs on April 2, the White House has set a deadline of August 1 before these will resume alongside some new, higher duties on Canada and Mexico. Meanwhile, the 90-day tariff truce between the U.S. and China agreed in May is set to end on August 12. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said this week that negotiations were going well, and floated the possibility of a further extension. Newsweek contacted the White House outside of regular hours via email for comment.
Business of Fashion
25 minutes ago
- Business of Fashion
Mexico Raises Import Taxes on Online Purchases From Shein, Temu
Mexico is raising import taxes on small online purchases from companies such as Chinese retailers Shein Group Ltd. and Temu as negotiations to avoid US tariffs go down to the wire. The new 33.5 percent levy, raised from a prior 19 percent, will apply to goods imported from China and other countries with which Mexico has no trade agreement. Products coming from the US and Canada via courier service will continue to pay a 17 percent duty if priced between $50 and $117. Those priced below that range will remain exempt while those above will now pay a 19 percent tax. The decision, published in the official gazette Monday evening, is an update to the international trade rules Mexico implemented earlier this year, widely seen as a response to US accusations that China was using Mexico as a back door to send cheap products into its northern neighbour or. Shein and Temu didn't immediately reply to requests for comment. Last year, Mexico increased tariffs on textile products coming from countries like China and stepped up raids on merchants that imported goods from Asian nations without paying taxes or obtaining the required permits. The higher import tax may be part of a strategy to rein in unfair competition or increase government revenue, but it will also have an impact on low-income consumers, said Juan Carlos Baker, Mexico's former undersecretary for foreign trade, who helped negotiate the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement. 'This tax increase will ultimately be paid by consumers, as the people who use these types of platforms to buy products tend to be the most disadvantaged,' he said. 'Goods are becoming more expensive for the people who need them most.' Mexico has been in intense talks with the US, seeking to avoid the 30 percent tariffs President Donald Trump has threatened to impose on the country starting Aug. 1. Today's move may be part of that negotiation strategy, said Diego Marroquin, fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. 'Sheinbaum's administration also seeks to increase tax revenue, close the doors to Chinese overcapacity and protect the domestic industry.' Learn more: EU Says Temu in Breach of Rules to Prevent Sale of Illegal Products The Chinese e-commerce giant could be facing up to 6 percent of global turnover for endangering consumers.
UPI
25 minutes ago
- UPI
Once the faces of American aid abroad, USAID workers mourn agency's demise
Before and after: The photo at the left shows the U.S. Agency for International Development main office at 1300 Pennsylvania Ave. NW in Washington before the administration's edict to disband the agency. At right is what the building looks like today. Photos by Bridget Erin Craig/UPI WASHINGTON, July 30 (UPI) -- For decades, workers at the U.S. Agency for International Development were among the quiet architects of American diplomacy, bringing food, medicine and governance reform to places where conflict and poverty had taken root. As of July 1, hundreds lost their jobs following President Donald Trump's executive order in January to consolidate foreign assistance programs. More layoffs are expected by Sept. 2. Some 1,600 U.S.-based employees were affected by the reduction in force, with thousands more around the globe impacted. Of 6,200 programs, some 5,200 were terminated. This story profiles three former USAID workers, all of whom requested anonymity out of concern for professional retaliation and the heightened political climate. They devoted their careers to public service-often in complex, high-risk environments. Now, having lost jobs they felt deeply called to, they say they can't speak for attribution due to ongoing administrative proceedings. "The toughest thing about the closure are the literally millions of people who have been denied life-saving aid," said a former senior foreign service officer who depicted the close connection between USAID and the United Nations World Food Program in which the United States was the top donor for many years. "One of the countries that we watched very close for the World Food Program and in previous administrations was Sudan," he continued. "The acute food insecurity in Sudan today affects probably over 25 million people. A subset of those are living in famine conditions. They're going to die, and the fact that we stopped or we've reduced our food aid under this administration is tragic." Founded in 1961 by President John F. Kennedy, USAID has long served as the primary engine for U.S. foreign aid, responsible for development assistance, disaster relief, global health and democratic governance. Operating in more than 100 countries, it helped the U.S. project influence without deploying troops -- a model many experts saw as essential to preventing conflict and fostering long-term alliances. "We were accused of being criminal and radical lunatics and extreme liberals doing this work. ... it's absolutely not true," a former USAID official said. "USAID was always bipartisan, ever since it was founded in early 1960s." In January, Secretary of State Marco Rubio paused all foreign assistance funded by or through the State Department and USAID, aligned with Trump's executive order to ensure programs were efficient and in step with the "America first" agenda. The abrupt dismantling of USAID marked a historic retreat from U.S. soft power and upended the lives of its career civil servants, many of whom had spent decades in service to global stability. Working in places from Afghanistan to South Africa, a former senior foreign service officer served under several presidents, beginning his career as a Peace Corps volunteer. "I loved the development work so much that I wanted to make a career out of it," he said. "It's purposeful work. I just feel blessed." But nothing prepared him for the shock of USAID's sudden dissolution. "I don't think any of us expected this," he said. "I think the complete erasure of USAID is not in the United States' interest. I think it will have terrible impacts on millions of people overseas." For him, USAID wasn't just a job to this former foreign service officer of more than 30 years. It was the quiet muscle behind American credibility. "Diplomacy and development are complementary but completely different disciplines," he said. "The State Department is brilliant at diplomacy. But development? It's longer-term. It's relational. And I'm not confident they have the personnel or the tools to do it right." He recalled rural communities in Colombia, saying that residents' biggest concern, although being located in conflict zones, was not the conflict -- it was roads. Through projects like helping to build roads, the United States was able to show up. "Without decent, passable roads, as a small farmer, the odds are stacked against you," he said, explaining the importance of soft-power development. A former USAID senior adviser to a mission in Asia described public service as her calling. Inspired as a teenager by her education, an encounter with a development official and early roles that centered on infrastructure development. She served in some of the world's most fragile environments, From Afghanistan to Uganda. "In Afghanistan, endless rockets came into our compound, tried to kill us," she recalled. "But this hurt more. This was worse in every way possible because it was coming from within those very people I was serving." In January as the new Trump administration took office, she and thousands of colleagues were abruptly dismissed. She had just arrived at what was supposed to be her dream overseas post. "I didn't even get to finish my tour," she said. "I was recalled and told I was no longer needed." The emotional toll was compounded by erasure. "Every record of everything I've worked on is gone -- every policy paper, every report, every project," she said. Similarly, another former USAID official shared his extensive experience before turning to working in development. Crossing from the private sector to public service, it was the agency's mission that inspired him most -- to use American development work as a tool for stability, goodwill and shared prosperity. "It was a wonderful experience," he said. "Professionally, it was the most meaningful work I've done -- and personally, it was great for our family." His duty stations spanned from Iraq to Uganda and Thailand. He witnessed development ripple outward-- from better seed varieties feeding a nation to electricity transforming a household. "I was able to be in a home and actually flip the lights on -- for the first time they had access to electricity," he said. "It changed their life. It gave them added security, it helped their children do homework at night without burning kerosene and it helped them make a little extra money by letting their neighbors use their power to charge their phones." What hurts most, he said, was not just the shutdown but rather its execution. "If the administration had said, 'We want to move in a different direction,'" he suggested that most people would have disagreed, but if it were handled professionally, they would have understood. Instead, he said, he and his colleagues were labeled criminals and radicals, and that was the basis for shutting the programs down. He said he believes the negative impact on U.S. credibility, fragile alliances and the mental health of career public servants will last years. "We built this up for 60 years to be a machine, and yes, it was bureaucratic and it was slow, but it did a lot of good work. The biggest challenge was the layer upon layer of excessive oversight," the former official said. The Trump administration has said that USAID's core functions are to be absorbed into the State Department, including foreign assistance, humanitarian relief and development aid. One former senior State Department official who frequently worked with USAID, and who asked to speak on background to candidly discuss internal fallout, questioned the ability of the State Department to absorb USAID's missions, given how vital the agency was in serving as the soft power arm of the United States. By empowering civil societies and helping build democracy from the bottom up, he said he believed USAID positively influenced development, entrusted its partners and helped stabilize regions. He said they way staffers were terminated was deeply troubling. After spending their careers as public servants, advancing U.S. interests often in difficult and dangerous conditions, employees were given little warning and treated as though they had done something wrong. The former official said he fears USAID's closure will have long-term consequences on America's global influence and credibility. He still encourages young people passionate about international development to continue working abroad with nongovernmental organizations and civil society groups -- and to remain hopeful. Trump had clashed with USAID during his first term, accusing it of promoting values that conflicted with his administration's agenda. But few expected the agency's total elimination during his second term. The decision drew swift backlash from allies, humanitarian organizations and several retired diplomats, who warned it would leave a vacuum in places where U.S. presence already was fading.
